¥ CT hah ge 
ifeaes Se saan 


33 


Telnet 


ahh 
$d) eects 


pibTh En Som, 
rs 

is is 
Pegigs 


4 *, 
ean te 
r 
is 
+> 7} | 
heats : 
a ; ae 
* 
reine 
ne 


oa 
RMU ef 
Strata 
aerate 


oe eens Ueber cH 
nay hate \: 
. ee 
iets M4 


Porn 
AG 


oes 
“ere = 
Coat thas 


‘ 


+ 
£ 


sty 


bh 
Nee 
is ps 


eben 
vie ENO 
eo 7 * 


2 “ 
- « x lan ~~ 
: rate 
FON 
cr Senn. 
et 


A EMS 
Wee ES Se 
x ™. 


Ot 
Fiviet 
sateirl 













>) 

i DEO A 1907 
Y, & 
Se oeign4 sew 


Division DG 87 
Section A 5 





ia 
a 

' 
oe . 
ine 


fe 
ae he 











MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION 
IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE 


This book is published on the Shreve Foundation established at 
Princeton University in memory of Benjamin Davis Shreve of the 
Class of 1856 by the bequest of his widow “‘ for the study of the 
history of nations, both ancient and modern, to ascertain the cause 
of their decay, degeneracy, extinction, and destruction, and to show 
the dangers that now exist and are arising which, if not checked, 
will injure, if not destroy, our free government.’ In 1924 
Professor Abbott was elected as the first Fellow on this Foundation. 


LONDON: HUMPHREY MILFORD 
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 


MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION 
IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE 
By aunt OF PRIA, a> 

FRANK PROSE ABBOTT [00 4 7 aa, x 


Late Kennedy Professor of Latin, Princeton Universi 


ee 





AND 
ALLAN CHESTER JOHNSON 


Professor of Classics, Princeton University 


PRINCETON 
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS 
MCMXxXVI 


PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN 


PREFACE 


The studies set forth in this volume were first planned by 
Professor Frank Frost Abbott in 1914. In collaboration 
with the present writer the work was carried on with many 
interruptions under the general editorship of Professor 
Abbott until his death, July 23, 1924. For his kindly 
criticisms and generous help I shall always remain pro- 


foundly grateful. 


The municipal institutions of the Roman Empire 
contain in large measure the secret of the vitality and the 
decay of that ancient civilization which controlled the 
destinies of the world for a longer span than any imperial 
power whose history has yet been recorded. For this 
reason it has been our aim to trace the history of the rela- 
tions of these municipalities to Rome, their differing 
status, the development of Roman policy towards them, 
and the circumstances attending their decline, and there- 
fore the decline of the empire. These matters and certain 
others clearly relating to them are set forth systematically 
in the Introduction. In this portion of the book we have 
made a study of the juridical and fiscal relations to Rome 
of communities of various classes, of the political organiza- 
tion and financial systems of these communities, of the 
attempts which were made to combine them into larger 
political entities through the provincial assemblies, of the 
development of the municipal policy of Rome, and the 
decline of the municipality. 

The last chapter, on municipal documents, may serve 
as a technical introduction to Part 11 of the book, in which 
are brought together inscriptions and papyri that throw 
light on the relations which the municipalities bore to 
Rome. These documents have hitherto been so widely 


vi PREFACE 


scattered that it was thought advisable to gather them 
together in order that those interested in municipal 
institutions might be able to gain a first-hand compre- 
hensive survey of the problems involved in their study. 
No collection of this kind exists and the information which 
such a corpus provides is definite and accurate. The lower 
limit of time for this collection has been set at the end of 
the third century, for the reason that most constitutions 
antedate the fourth century and the influences which 
determined the course of events are clearly discernible in 
the earlier period. Moreover, it would be impossible to 
deal fully with the Byzantine period without doubling 
the compass of the book. | 

- It has been the aim of the editors to include all in- 
scriptions which furnish information of importance 
bearing upon the relations of Rome to her municipalities. 
Very fragmentary inscriptions and those which gave no 
information, known from documents already included, 
have been omitted. In the case of the documents from 
Egypt our choice has been limited more especially to the 
more important and representative papyri dealing with 
the towns and villages from the Roman occupation to the 
beginning of the Byzantine period. 

In general it should be stated for the purpose of de- 
fining the work of the two collaborators, that Mr Abbott 
directed his attention to conditions in the West, and the 
present writer to those in the East. This means, practically, 
that the former is primarily responsible for the Latin 
inscriptions and for the commentaries on them, and the 
latter for the Greek and bilingual inscriptions, the papyri, 
and the commentaries on the documents of these three 
classes. The authorship of each chapter in the Introduction 
is indicated in the Table of Contents. The manuscript 
of Mr Abbott’s portion was fortunately in final form, and 
is here published with slight editorial revision. 

In view of the cost of printing, critical notes have been 
reduced to a minimum, typographical devices in the texts 


PREFACE Vil 


have been used as sparingly as possible, and in the Latin 
inscriptions in particular deviations from the text of a stone 
or tablet have been indicated simply by the use of italic 
letters. In the text of the papyri indications of obscure or 
doubtful letters by the customary convention have been 
omitted, but in all cases where the interpretation of a 
document depends upon the reading, the fact has been 
indicated in the commentary. 

In conclusion, thanks are due to Professor John W. 
Basore for reading the manuscript; to Professor Paul R. 
Coleman-Norton for undertaking the arduous task of 
verifying references and reading proof; to Professor D. M. 
Robinson for furnishing in advance of publication his text 
and commentary on the inscription discovered by him at 
Antioch; to Professor Edward Capps for his generous 
and helpful interest in these studies; and finally, to the 
Secretary and staff of the Cambridge University Press for 
their unfailing courtesy and care. 


ALLAN CHESTER JOHNSON 


PRINCETON 
March 20, 1926 


‘ 


at eae A 


seni” 


Fam 


4 





VI. 


VII. 


XV. 


II. 


CONTENTS 


PART 


COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA (4bdbot?) 


PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, CONCILI- 
ABULA, CANABAE, PAGI, GENTES, SALTUS (4dbott?) 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT (‘fohnson) 
THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT (Fohnson) 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES AND CIVITATES 
STIPENDIARIAE (Abbott) 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC AND 
EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST (4bbo?t) 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC AND 
EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST (fohnson) 


HONORES AND MUNERA (‘fohnson) 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND REQUISITIONS IN THE 
PROVINCES (Abbott) 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES (Abbott) 
ARBITRATION AND TREATIES (‘fohnson) 
PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES (fohnson) 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 
(‘Fohnson) 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 
(‘Fohnson) 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS AND THEIR PREPARA- 
TION (Abbott) 


PAR T.LI 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 
FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


page 3 


IO 
Faq 


31 


39 


TE 


ey 


232, 


247 
507 


hve he te yy, VAT, J x vs De fs ; . 
' ‘ . 


} id ma 


t 


oh 


7 iikucva te Ani owe. 


ae a BOR 
‘Tat 7 eg ny Piemes , 


4 


Been 


a 


ee 
> 7 
fie 7 
ner 


, 


: a oe A 
# A mero 


a 


rie 


ft te 
ad ae? Pies Sex) a 
tN te 
WY bhbe ‘ i 
, . 





PART I 


INTRODUCTION 


an f 
Ae ht PCO 


er vin 


er be Mp A" 
a me Rl): nari) tb 
} 


‘ 
fi ; 

Whe Hae A 

a BG 

i" At 





CHAPLET ER. tf 


COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA! 
i ONG before the republic came to an end Rome had 


placed the different communities which had been 
brought under her control in five or six well defined 
_ categories, according to their political status. But these 
distinctions do not hold for the earliest settlements or 
acquisitions of territory outside the physical limits of the 
city. The little market-towns which sprang up in early 
days on Roman territory had no separate political existence, 
and those who lived in them enjoyed no political rights or 
privileges because of their residence in them. Even Ostia 
had no local magistrates at the outset?. It was a part of 
the city-state of Rome. In other words Rome did not 
recognize the possibility of local self-government in any 
community dependent upon her or under her suzerainty. 
This policy was violated when Rome took certain com- 

munities under her control, but allowed them to retain 
some part of their previous sovereignty. She adopted the 
new practice for the first time, according to tradition, in 
the case of Antium, whose people were made up partly of 
Roman colonists and partly of earlier settlers3. Livy tells 

1 ‘The early chapters of this Introduction are intended to present in out- 
line the characteristic features of the different classes of municipalities under 
the Roman government, and to observe the changes in the political status of 
these towns or in the method of founding them which we notice in passing 
from one period to another, or from one part of the Roman world to another. 
It should be observed, however, that no description can be given which will 
be applicable to all the members of a class, because they did not all enjoy 
identical rights and privileges. Some of the differences between towns of 
the same class in the matter of autonomy will be discussed in the commen- 
taries on the several inscriptions. 

2 Cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 775. 

3 Mommsen, S¢. R. 3, 778; Kornemann, R.£. 4, 585. 


He el ah 


COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA 


us: Antiatibus quoque, qui se sine legibus certis, sine magis- 
tratibus agere querebantur, dati ab senatu ad 1ura statuenda 
ipsius coloniae patroni. Communities of this sort had their 
own charters, and elected magistrates took the place of the 
prefects heretofore sent out by Rome. Local pride prob- 
ably played a part in bringing about this change, and a 
desire to retain as much as possible of the old institutions 
and customs of the place, and the feeling that residents 
could administer the affairs of a village better than non- 
residents. Whether Rome thought it a wise policy to yield 
to these pleas for self-government, or whether she followed 
the line of least resistance, it is hard to say. 

At all events the way was open for the incorporation into 
the Roman state of communities possessing some measure 
of local autonomy. Such a political unit was called a 
civitas, whether it took the form of a city or not, whereas 
the term oppidum was used only of a city. The free use of 
the word civitas for Roman as well as for non-Roman com- 
munities begins in the second century of our eral. Before 
that time it was usually applied to native communities 
only, while those of Roman origin were styled coloniae 
or municipia. It is convenient for us to make this early 
distinction in the present discussion. 

Colonies were cities or villages made up of settlers sent 
out by Rome?. They fell into two classes, coloniae civium 
Romanorum and coloniae Latinorum, according to the 
political rights of the settlers and the status of the colony. 
The founding of a colony was a sovereign act, and, there- 
fore, under the early republic it was effected by a J/ex, 
while under the empire it was the prerogative of the em- 
peror. Before the period of the revolution the establish- 


1 Kornemann, R.E. Suppl. Erstes Heft, 302 f. 

2 Much use has been made in this discussion of colonies of Kornemann’s 
excellent article colonia in R.E. 4, 511 ff. Other important articles are de 
Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. 2, 415 f.; Lenormant, Dict. Dar. 1. 1303 f.; Momm- 
sen, St. R. 3 passim; Marquardt, St. Verw. 1 passim; Abbott, Class. Phil. 


10 (1915), 365 f. 
foun 


COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA 


ment of a colony called for the enactment of a special law 
by the popular assembly. This law specified the location 
of the colony, and the amount of state-land to be assigned, 
fixed the number of commissioners entrusted with the duty 
of making the settlement, and determined their duties. A 
typical instance of the method of founding a colony is the 
case of Antium!. In the period of transition, Sulla, Caesar, 
and the triumvirs did not trouble themselves to secure the 
passage of a special law, but acted by virtue of the general 
powers given to them. Thus Urso is styled a colonia iussu 
C. Caesaris dictatoris deducta®. Octavius, Antony, and 
Lepidus based their right to found colonies on the /ex 
Titia, which established the triumvirate. When this 
transfer of authority had come about, of course the new 
sovereign named the commissioners, as the people had 
done in earlier days. It was the duty of the commissioners 
to lead the colonists out, settle them upon the land, estab- 
lish the form of government, and nominate the first 
incumbents of office. The colonists were given conquered 
land set aside for the purpose. 

The settlers in a Roman colony were Roman citizens, 
with an occasional admixture of soc#i, and in Italy they had 
full right of ownership in their land (ex iure Quiritium), and 
the Roman settlers enjoyed all the other public and private 
rights of Roman citizens, except in the matter of holding 
Roman magistracies. In the enjoyment of this privilege 
they were for a time restricted?, When Roman colonies 
in the later period were established in the provinces, the 
land was usually left subject to the burdens of other pro- 
vincial land. 

The Latin differed from the Roman colonies in size, 
composition, and political status. Three hundred was the 
normal number sent out to a Roman colony*, rarely as 
many as 2000 or 3000°%, while Latin colonies usually 


1 Livy, 3. I. 5-7. 2 Cf. no. 26, chap. 106. 
° Cf. no. It. SiC As ek. IVY, S024 vit ts 
° Cf. Livy, 39. 553 41. 13. 


or 


COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA 


numbered several thousand!. The majority of those who 
were sent out to a Latin colony were Latins or Italian 
allies, but Romans who were willing to accept Latin in 
place of their Roman citizenship were also enrolled. ‘The 
Latin colonies of the early period bore the same relation 
to Rome that the members of the Latin League had held. 
They were free from the payment of tribute. They had 
the right of coinage. They had their own magistrates and 
laws, and they enjoyed the same private rights as Roman 
citizens?. On the other hand, while the settlers in the early 
Roman colonies were excused from regular military service, 
each Latin colony was required to furnish a military con- 
tingent to serve in the a/ae or cohortes. However, the 
twelve Latin colonies which were founded after 268 B.c. 
suffered a diminution in their privileges. They lost the 
right of coinage and the zws conubii, and they found it more 
difficult to obtain Roman citizenship®. Still another change 
in the situation came about in 89 B.c., for by virtue of the 
grant of Roman citizenship to the Italians in this year, all 
Latin colonies south of the Po were transformed into 
Roman municipia. In the same year the cities in Transpa- 
dane Gaul were given the rights of Latin citizenship, to 
be transformed in 49 B.c. into those of Roman citizenship. 
Consequently Latin colonies henceforth disappear from 
the peninsula. 

In Italy and the provinces the Latin colonies numbered 
about sixty-one, and the Roman colonies, about three 
hundred and eighty-one*. The earliest colonies were estab- 
lished as military outposts to hold and Romanize newly 
acquired territory. The most characteristic feature of the 
Roman colonies was the fact that they were established on 
the coast. This practice was followed without exception 
until 183 B.c., when the rule was broken by sending 


1 Cf. Livy, 10. 1. 1-2. 

2 Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 627 ff. 

3 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 518; cf., however, Steinwenter, R.E. 10, 1267 f. 
4 Kornemann, R.£. 4, 514_/7.; v. Premerstein, R.E. 10, 1240. 


Raw 


COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA 


Roman colonies to Mutina, Parma, and Saturnia. A 
change in the motives which led to the founding of 
colonies appears under the Gracchi, who used colonization 
for the purpose of relieving the needy population of Rome, 
of promoting the prosperity of the country districts, and 
of stimulating trade. The admission of the proletariat to 
the army by Marius naturally led him to found colonies 
for needy veterans. A step which looked to this change in 
policy had been taken as early as 171 B.c. in the case of 
Carteia in Spain, which was settled by the sons born of 
Roman soldiers and Spanish women. The precedent thus 
set at Carteia, and taken up by Marius, of providing for 
veterans in colonies, was freely followed by the triumvirs 
and under the empire. 

Narbo Martius, established in Gallia Narbonensis in 
118 B.c., is the first clear instance of a colony outside 
the peninsula of Italy, a precedent which was not fully 
accepted until we come to the time of Caesar and the 
triumvirs, under whom between forty and fifty such settle- 
ments were made in the provinces?. Under the empire 
this policy was gradually discontinued. From the time of 
Hadrian almost all the new colonies in the provinces were 
not newly established settlements, but existing municipia 
or native civitates to which the title and rights of a colony 
were given by the emperor. This change in status was 
usually in the provinces the first step towards the acquisi- 
tion of Latin rights and of immunity from the payment of 
tribute?. 

The change which the republican system of nomencla- 
ture underwent under the dictators of the first century B.c. 
is significant of a change in the seat of power. The earliest 
instance of the new practice of naming a colony in honor 
of its autocratic founder is probably that of the colonia 
Mariana. The practice became the accepted one under the 


1 Abbott, Class. Phil. 10 (1915), 372f- 
2 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 566. 


Bea 


COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA 


empire, and is helpful in determining the foundation-date 
of a colony’, 

A municipium was not a new settlement, as a colony was, 
but resulted from the incorporation of a ‘conquered town 
into the Roman state?. The functions of its local magis- 
trates and the limitations put upon their powers were 
determined in each case by the charter granted to it. Some 
interesting specimens of charters granted to colonies and 
municipia have come down to us from the time of the late 
republic, for Tarentum in Italy? and for the colony of 
Urso in Spain4, and from the time of the empire, for the 
municipia of Salpensa and Malaca in Spain®. The inhabit- 
ants of a municipium received complete Roman citizenship, 
as in Lanuvium and Aricia®, or received it in a restricted 
form, sine suffragio, as in Fundi and Formiae, or with such 
limitations as the provincial municipia of Salpensa and 
Malaca had at a later date’. As we have already noticed, 
all the civitates sine suffragio south of the Po were given 
Roman citizenship by the /eges Iulia et Plautia Papiria of 
go—89 B.c. Like Roman colonists the citizens in municipia 
were liable to service in the legions, and were subject to 
all the munera to which Roman citizens were subject. 
Indeed the ancients believed that the word municipium 
was derived from munus and capere. In their juridical 
position the munictpia differed from the colonies in the 
fact that they could retain their traditional procedure in 
cases heard by their local magistrates, whereas the colonies 


1 For a list of the imperial appellatives used, cf. de Ruggiero, Le Colonie 
dei Romani, 96. 

2 Recent literature: Comparette, 4. F. PZ. 27 (1906), 166 #7; Decla- 
reuil, Quelgues problémes d'histoire des institutions municipales au temps de 
LEmpire romain; Heisterbergk in PAilo/. 50 (1891), 639 77.3 Jouguet, Vie 
munic.; Jung, Hist. Zeitschr. 67 (1891), 1 ff.3 Levy, Rev. d. é. grecg. 8 
(1895), 203 #3 12 (1899), 255 #3 14 (1899), 350 /.; Liebenam, Sz. 
Verw.; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 293 f7.; Toutain, Dict. Dar. 5.0. munici- 
pium; aronein: Les cités romaines de la Tunisie. 

BiNOW eo. £ No. 26: 5 Nos. 64 and 65. 

6 Livy, 8. 14. 2-3. 7 Livy, 8. 14. 10; no. 64. 


[ 8 ] 


COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA 


followed Roman law. If a municipium in Italy adopted 
Roman law, it was known as a municipium fundanum}. 

In the provinces we find two main classes of municipia, 
those whose citizens had Roman, and those whose citizens 
were restricted to Latin citizenship*. Some cities of the 
second class had the maius Latium, others only the minus 
Latium, Citizens in communities having the maius Latium 
gained Roman citizenship when admitted to the local 
senate. In towns having minor Latin rights only election 
to a local magistracy could win this privilege for them®. 
Provincial municipia, like colonies and peregrine ctvitates, 
were subject to tribute, and did not enjoy full ownership 
of land, although perhaps the ius Italicum was granted to 
favored munictpia. This right by a legal fiction made their 
land part of Italy, and therefore conferred full ownership, 
or dominium, on the holders, as well as freedom from the 
payment of tribute*. So far as local administration was 
concerned, most municipia were more or less under the 
control of the governor of their province, whereas the 
colonies were strictly autonomous in the matter of local 
affairs®. ‘This difference explains in part why so many 
provincial municipia begged the emperors to make them 
colonies. 


1 Cf. Elmore, Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 4.7, 35 ff. 

2 Toutain, Dict. Dar. s.0. municipium, 2030 f. 

3 Gaius, I. 95-96; no. 64. 

4 Cf. v. Premerstein, R.E£. 10, 1242 ff. 

5 On the possession of /idertas by Roman colonies, cf. Toutain, M#/. d. 
arch. 18 (1898), 141 ff; v. Premerstein, op. cit. 1248. 


[9 ] 


CHAPTER II 


PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, 
CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, PAGI, GENTES, 
SALTUS! 


she: writer of the lex de Gallia Cisalpina, in desig- 


nating the communities in Cisalpine Gaul to which 

a certain provision is to apply, mentions oppidum 
municipium colonia praefectura forum vicus conciliabulum 
castellum territorium®. Oppidum is a generic word for an 
autonomous community, and serritorium is used of the 
country district outside the limits of a settlement, but 
belonging to it. The other words in the list have more or 
less definite technical meaning, and if to them we add the 
terms pagus, gens, canabae, and saltus, we shall probably 
have a complete catalogue of the names given in the West 
to the smaller administrative units. The first three of these 
terms, municipium, colonia, and praefectura, stand apart 
from the rest to indicate communities of a clearly marked, 
general type, and again the praefectura, which did not 
enjoy all the rights of self-government in local affairs, 
stands opposed to the more fortunate municipium and 
colonia. Praefectura, in fact, may be thought of as a generic 
term applicable to any community which lacked the full 
right of self-government. In this sense, as we shall see, 
1 Outside of the discussions in the standard treatises of Mommsen 
(Sz. R. 3,765 f.), Marquardt (St. Verw. 1, 34 f.), Willems (Droit public 
rom. 357 f.) and Madvig (Verf. u. Verw. 1, 44, 49), some of the most 
recent literature on the communities treated in this chapter are papers by 
Schulten in Pilol. 53 (1894), 629-686; Hermes, 29 (1894), 481-516; 
and R%. Mus. 50 (1895), 489-557; Hardy, Six Roman Laws, 143 ff. and 
articles under the pertinent headings in Dict. Dar., R.E. and the Diz. Ep. 


For a convenient list of the praefecturae, fora, vici, castella, pagi, and saltus 
mentioned in Dessau’s collection of inscriptions, cf. Dessau, 3, pp. 619, 


660-664, 669. 
PONG. 27:02 15 Le 2 fs 


[ 10 ] 


PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, ere. 


it comprehends all the terms, except serritorium, which 
follow it in the list given above. 

The title praefectus was given to an official to whom 
some higher authority had delegated the power to perform 
certain functions. So far as the villages and cities of the 
empire were concerned, the source of authority might be 
the central government at Rome or some one of the 
civitates. ‘The officials of the first sort were the praefecti 
iure dicundo sent out by the urban praetor to administer 
justice in the settlements founded by Rome or annexed 
. by her, as well as the special praefecti iure dicundo Capuae 
Cumis who were elected in the comitia on the nomination of 
the praetor. The term prefecture could also be applied 
to the small communities which did not have an inde- 
pendent status, but were attached to a neighboring 
civitas. In this case the authority of the prefect came, not 
from Rome, but from the civitas. The residents in Italian 
prefectures connected with Rome lacked in the early 
period some of the qualities of citizenship, but later these 
communities either attained the position of municipia, or 
while retaining the name of praefecturae, differed from 
municipia only in the fact that they did not have L/ viri 
or IV viri1, As for the other class of prefectures, they 
maintained their existence down to a late date. Civitates 
usually had zerritoria dependent upon them. In these 
territoria hamlets were scattered here and there, and in the 
_ villages at a distance from the governing city justice was 
administered and certain other powers were exercised by 
a prefect sent out for that purpose by the municipal 
authorities. To such an official, for instance, reference 
seems to be made in CYL. x, 6104, an inscription of the 
Augustan age: Carthagine aedilis, praefectus iure dicundo 
vectigalibusque quinquennalibus locandis in castellis 
Lxxx111. Similarly the magistrates of the Genuenses ex- 
ercised jurisdiction over the residents of the castellum 


1 Cagnat, Dict. Dar. s.v. praefectura. 


[a1 J 


PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, 


Vituriorum!, In one case we hear of the duovir of a colony 
acting as prefect of a castellum*. It is impossible to draw 
an exact line of distinction between the several minor com- 
munities, but for purposes of convenience in discussion 
the fora, conciliabula, vici, and castella may be put together. 
These in turn fall into two groups, the fora and conciliabula 
on the one hand, and the vici and castella on the other. 
Settlements of the first two classes were always authorized 
by the central government and thus bore a certain re- 
semblance to colonies. Indeed it is quite possible that in 
the earliest period Roman colonies held the same legal 
relation to Rome as the fora and conciliabula did in later 
times*. This official relation for the fora is indicated by 
such typical names as Forum Popili and Forum Livi. 
Most of them were founded by Roman magistrates 
charged with the construction of a highway, and the name 
is found most frequently in northern Italy®, and for settle- 
ments made under the republic. In the last century of the 
republic most of the fora and conciliabula were erected into 
communities with full rights of local self-government. 
On a somewhat lower plane stood the vici and caste/la. 
Of them Isidore remarks®: vici et castella et pagi sunt, 
quae nulla dignitate civitatis ornantur, sed vulgari homi- 
num conventu incoluntur et propter parvitatem sui 
maioribus civitatibus attribuuntur. The vici, at least, were 
usually private settlements, and the caste//a may be re- 
garded as fortified vici, although in the founding of a 
castellum probably the initiative would ordinarily be taken 
by a military authority, and the commandant may well 
have acted at the outset as the local magistrate’, Most of 


1 No. ro, ll. 43-44. For a specific illustration of the relations between a 
civitas and its attributi, see commentary on no. 49 on the question at issue 
between the municipium of ‘Tridentum and the Anauni. 


P.GLL. Vill, 115720. 3 Schulten, R.E. 4, 799 f. 
4 Mommsen, St. R. 3, 775 ff. 5 Schulten, R.£. 7, 62. 
ORO S08 F207 ? Mommsen, Hermes, 24 (1889), 200. 


[ 12 ] 


CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, Etc. 


the caste/la were naturally on the frontiers}, Some of the 
vici and castella were in time made independent com- 
munities. This happened, for instance, in the case of 
Sufes*, and occasionally a cévitas was reduced to the 
position of a dependent vicus. An interesting instance of 
this sort is furnished by the petition of the people of 
Orcistus?, In a few cases we find the name vicus cana- 
barum* applied to a community, but settlements of this 
sort do not seem to have differed from canabae, which 
come next in the order of discussion. 

This word in its general sense was applied to the 
temporary shops and booths put up by merchants. It 
was natural to use it also of the settlements of merchants 
and camp-followers which sprang up about the camps. 
They were usually located so as to leave a free space 
between the fortifications of the camp and the hamlet in 
question. The organization was based on the resident 
Roman citizens, and, with its magistri or curatores®, prob- 
ably bore a close resemblance to the conventus civium 
Romanorum, of which we have a reasonably complete 
record®, Probably the native women by whom the 
soldiers in the camp had children lived in these nearby 
villages, so that it was natural for the veterans on receiving 
their discharge and the legalization of their marriages 
to settle in the canabae with their wives and children. To 
them we have reference in an inscription from Aquincum’ 
and elsewhere. In the history of the Roman municipality 
the canabae have a special interest for us, because we can, 


1 For a list, not absolutely complete, cf. Diz. Ep. 2, 130 f. The cas- 
tellum Carcassonne has preserved its external features up to the present day. 

2 CIL. vin, 11427; Kubitschek, R.£. 3, 1757. 

3 No. 154. 4 Schulten, PAilol. 53 (1894), 671. 

5 CIL. 111, 6166; v, 5747; and the phrase civibus Romanis consistenti- 
bus ad canabas leg. v (4. ép. 1920, no. 54). 

6 See Kornemann, s.v. conventus, R.E. 4, 1182-1200. Mommsen’s 
theory (Hermes, 7 (1873), 299 /-) that the cazabae had a military organiza- 
tion is no longer held; cf. Schulten, R.L. 3, 1452; Hermes 29 (1894), 507. 

MCIAINI2 SOs. 


Rascal 


PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, 


in some instances, trace their growth from the earliest 
settlement by Roman citizens up to the granting of a 
municipal charter. This is true, for example, of Apulum}, 
Aquincum’, Carnuntum®%, and notably of Lambaesis*. 
Some of these settlements, like Carnuntum, even attained 
the dignity of a colony®. 

The pagus® differed essentially from all the communities 
which have been mentioned thus far. The meaning of the 
term varied somewhat from one period to another and 
from one part of the Roman world to another, but the 
canton was always thought of as a rural administrative 
unit, and was opposed in sense to ctvitas, urbs, or oppidum. 
The Romans found these rural subdivisions in their con- 
quest of Italy and of other parts of the western world, and 
they were frequently preserved intact, but were usually 
given a Roman name. Caesar uses the term to indicate 
part of a native tribe’, but under the empire it came to 
designate very definitely a territorial unit. 

The inhabitants of a canton might live dispersed or in 
hamlets (vici). They formed a commune for such religious 
purposes as the celebration of festivals and the mainten- 
ance of the local cult, and for such administrative purposes 
as the repairing of roads and the apportionment of the 
water supply. The religious side of the community life is 
indicated by such names as pagus Martius and pagus 
Apollinaris, although other cantons bore a local name, e.g. 
pagus Veronensis, or even a gentile name, as was the case, 
for instance, with the pagus Valerius. The cantons enjoyed 
a certain degree of autonomy. We read in the inscriptions 


1 'Tomaschek, R.E. 2, 290/f. . 

2 ‘Tomaschek, R.F. 2, 333. 3 Kubitschek, R.E. 3, 1601 f. 

4 Wilmanns, Comm. Mommsen, 190 f7.; Cagnat, L’armée romaine 
a’ Afrique, passim. 

PCL tt, 4236. 

6 An extended discussion of the subject is given by A. Schulten, Die 
Landgemeinden in rim. Reich, Philol. 53 (1894), 629-655. For recent 
literature, see Toutain in Dict. Dar. and Liibker, Reallexikon, s.v. pagus. 

Liat eM ED Op Ge 


E t4.] 


CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, erc. 


of their magistri and their decrees. In most cases probably 
the decrees were passed in popular assemblies, but in one 
case at least, we hear of the decurions of acanton!, In later 
days the pagi must have lost largely their rights of self- 
government, because after Diocletian’s time we hear fre- 
quently of the praefecti or praepositi pagorum*. 

A larger rural unit than the pagus was the gens or 
populus. In Spain and Gaul, for instance, the Romans 
found it convenient to deal with the tribal organizations, 
and to accept the division of these tribes into the tradition- 
ally accepted smaller cantons. The Helvetii, for example, 
were divided into four cantons in Caesar’s time®, A 
judicial prefect was put in charge of a tribe or group of 
cantons. Thus we hear of a praef. gentis Cinithiorum* and 
a praefectus civitatium in Alpibus Maritumis®. In these 
cases Rome dealt with a whole people, not with single 
cities. Each tribe, however, had one or more villages, 
which were made centres of administration. If these grew 
in importance, they might develop into autonomous cities, 
and receive Latin or Roman rights as the principal village 
of the Voconti did ®. 

At the bottom of the scale, so far as the enjoyment of 
self-government was concerned, were the co/oni on large 
private and imperial estates. Our information about the 
political and economic organization of these estates in the 
West comes almost entirely from inscriptions found 
during the last forty years’. All but one of these docu- 


1 CIL. vi, 1548. : 

2 The conventus civium Romanorum scarcely belong among the com- 
munities under discussion here. 

we Gat 1: 4° CIL. vit;; 10800, 5 GIL. v, 1838. 

6 Cf. Kornemann, R.£. 4, 545 and Schulten, R4. Mus. 50 (1895), 521. 

? ‘These inscriptions are the Epistula data a Licinio Maximo et Feliciore 
Augusti liberto procuratoribus ad exemplum legis Mancianae (no. 74) found 
in 1896 at Henchir-Mettich, the Ara legis Hadrianae (Bruns, 115) found 
in 1892 at Ain-Ouassel, the Sermo et epistulae procuratorum de terris vacuis 
excolendis (no. 93) found in 1906 at Ain-el-Djemala, the Rescriptum Com- 
modi de saltu Burunitano (no. 111) found in 1879 at Souk-el-Khmis, and 


[ae 5.8] 


PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, 


ments come from Africa, so that a description of the 
organization of the sa/tus based on them applies strictly 
to that region, although the same system in its general 
outlines probably prevailed in other parts of the empire. 
The growth of great estates is closely connected with the 
policy which Rome adopted in dealing with the ager 
publicus. The land of a conquered people passed auto- 
matically under Roman ownership. Some of the cultivated 
land might be used as the site of a colony, some turned 
back to the natives in return for a rental. As for the un- 
cultivated land, capital was needed for its development, 
and it was occupied to a great extent by rich Roman 
landlords. Under this system immense estates came under 
the control of private owners both in Italy and the pro- 
vinces. This was particularly true of Africa, of which Pliny 
tells us that in Nero’s time sex domini semissem Africae 
possidebant, cum interfecit eos Nero princeps'. The early 
emperors, as one may infer from Pliny’s remark, saw 
clearly the political and economic danger with which this 
situation threatened the government and society, and set 
themselves to work to remove it?. The land must belong 
to the state. This change in ownership was accomplished 
partly by way of legacies, but in larger measure through 
confiscation. The land became again public land, to be 
administered henceforth by the emperor, and by the time 
of the Flavians most of the great estates had become 
crown-lands*. They were too large to be made the 
territoria of neighboring cities. They were therefore 
organized on an independent basis, and with the formation 
of the sa/tus a new and far-reaching principle was intro- 
duced into the imperial system. Hitherto Rome had made 
the Rescriptum Philipporum ad colonos vici cuiusdam Phrygiae, found in 
1897 in Phrygia (no. 141). Cf also nos. 122 and 142. Information con- 
cerning the system followed on each of these imperial domains may be 
found in the commentaries on the inscriptions mentioned. 


tN. 18. 6) 35. 
2 Cf. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 378. 
3 Rostowzew, Op. cit. 379. 


[ 16 ] 


CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, erc. 


the cévitas the political and social unit. It had dealt 
administratively with the individual through the magis- 
trates or decurions of his community. The co/oni on an 
imperial estate had no political organization, or at most 
only a rudimentary one. They were, therefore, brought 
into direct relations with the emperor or his personal 
representative. In carrying out this plan of government 
for the domains located in a given region, a method was 
adopted not unlike that which had been followed in the 
case of a newly acquired province. Just as a senatorial 
commission under the republic had drawn up a /ex pro- 
vinciae to fix the relations of the civitates to the central 
government and the form of government for the province 
within which they lay, or just as emperors granted charters 
to municipalities, so representatives of the emperor drew 
up a statute for the domains of a given district. The earliest 
of these statutes to which we have any reference is the 
lex Manciana', which was probably not a system of regula- 
tions drawn up by the owner of a private estate, as is 
commonly supposed”, but was rather the work of an im- 
perial legate, perhaps of the Emperor Vespasian®. The 
lex Manciana continued in force in Africa until it was 
supplanted by the /ex Hadriana, to which reference is 
made in a document of the time of Commodus® and in 
another of a later date®. From a study of these docu- 
ments, supplemented by information to be had from other 
inscriptions, it is possible to determine the administrative 
system which was introduced into the imperial domains. 
Fach estate, or sa/tus, was in charge of a procurator saltus, 
who was usually a freedman, and all the procurators of a 
given region were under a procurator tractus, of equestrian 


EONo: 74.11.63 
2 Hirschfeld, 123, n. 3; Seeck, R.E. 4, 484; Toutain, Nouv. rev. hist. de 


droit fr. et dtr. 21 (1897), 393.f-3 23 (1899), 141 ff. 
3 Rostowzew, op. ctt. 329. SNo\. bit, \ll.,5,)26- 
® Bruns;.115, 1..7. 


AMA ea 2 


PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, 


rank!, Sometimes between these two officials was a 
procurator regionis. ‘The procurators were not under the 
control of the proconsul, but were directly responsible to 
the emperor?. The business affairs of an estate were in 
charge of a conductor, who was a freeman or a freedman 
and was responsible for the management of the entire 
estate. Most of the land was rented to tenants under 
five-year contracts, and each tenant was personally re- 
sponsible for the payment of the rental to the imperial 
collector. In case of non-payment the conductor proceeded 
against him. Part of the land in an estate could be 
leased by the conductor and worked directly by him or 
leased to tenants*. For the purpose of working this land 
he could require a certain number of days’ labor annually 
from each tenant. 

With this sketch in mind of the administrative arrange- 
ments on an estate, let us fill in some of the details of the 
plan. No specimen of the fundamental law for an estate 
has come down to us in its entirety, but the articles of the 
lex Manciana and lex Hadriana which are extant prove that 
it provided in the minutest detail for the regulation of the 
affairs of the imperial domains. It established a system of 
administration; 1t specified the powers and duties of the 
procurator, the conductor, and their assistants; it determined 
the rights and duties of the co/onus, fixed his rental, and 
provided for him a method of appeal. Such a law was 
drawn up for a large region. Consequently it might 
violate the usage of a particular locality. There were two 
points especially in which this seems to have happened, 
viz. in determining the amount of corn, wine, or other 


1 For a list of the ¢ractus in Africa, cf. Schulten, Die rémischen Grund- 
herrschaften, 62 ff. For a list of the imperial domains in other parts of the 
Roman world, cf. Hirschfeld, Der Grundbesitz d. rim. Kaiser in d. ersten 
drei ‘Fahrhunderten, Klio, 2 (1902), 45-72; 284-315. 

2 Hirschfeld, K/io, 2 (1902), 295. 

3 Rostowzew, Geschichte d. Staatspacht, 443. 

4 Rostowzew, op. cit. 443-4. 


[ 18 ] 


CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, ere. 


produce which the tenant should pay as rental1, and in 
fixing the number of days’ labor which the conductor 
might require of the tenant. In case of dispute on such 
points the matter was referred to the procurator saltus, or 
was carried up to the emperor or his deputy, the pro- 
curator tractus. The same method of appeal was followed 
if the fundamental law was violated. ‘Thus the tenants on 
the sa/tus Burunitanus complain that they are required to 
give more than six days’ labor each year to the conductor, 
that the conductor is very wealthy and has secured the 
support of the procurator of the estate, and that they have 
been flogged and maltreated by soldiers, although some 
of them are Roman citizens*. In the case of such petitions 
as this the emperor caused his decision to be engraved on 
a tablet and to be placed where it could be seen by all the 
tenants. 

Within the limitations of, and in accordance with, the 
forms imposed by the statute and by subsequent decisions 
of the emperor, the procurator was the administrative and 
judicial officer of the domain. It is his duty to maintain 
order, and he may even employ soldiers for this purpose®. 
The tenants on the sa/tus Burunitanus recognize their 
lowly condition in their petition to the emperor by speak- 
ing of themselves as rustict tui vernulae et alumni saltuum 
tuorum®, Inasmuch as they had the right to petition the 
emperor and had a magister, they evidently had a rudi- 
mentary political organization, but they had no form of 
local government’. ‘They did not even have the political 
rights which attributi enjoyed, because they were attached 
to no civitas. The fact that the domains were extra- 
municipal carried with it certain advantages as well as 


1 Hyginus, Gromatici veteres (Lachmann), 205. 

2 Cf. no. 111, Col. 1, ll. 12-13. 

3 Tbid. Col. 111, Il. 1-12. 4 Ibid. Col. u, ll. 11-16. 
Rulord, Cou, Litt. 6 [bid. Col. 11, Il. 28-29. 
7 


Ibid. Col. tv, 1. 27; cf. also Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. 3, 963 f- 
[ 19 ] 2-2 


PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, ere. 


disadvantages!, The co/oni were thereby relieved from all 
the municipal charges which in the later period weighed 
so heavily on the civitates. The evil side of their political 
situation layin the fact that they formeda special social class, 
ina territory of well marked limits, under officials with large 
powers whose sympathies lay with their masters, the conduc- 
tores. Their only recourse was to the emperor, and appeal 
to him was difficultand dangerous. As the control of the cen- 
tral government over the outlying regions became weaker, 
the co/oniwere moreand moreatthe mercy of the conductores*. 

As we have noticed in another connection®, the de- 
basement of the coinage and the pressing need of food for 
the Roman rabble and for the armies, forced Diocletian 
to make contributions in kind a fixed part of the tribute 
from the provinces. This heavy demand, coming as it 
did at a time when the amount of cultivated land was de- 
creasing, and the productivity of the soil declining, called 
for higher rentals than tenants were willing to pay. Their 
only recourse was to abandon their holdings, but this 
would have made matters still worse. It must be pre- 
vented at all hazards, and Constantine made it illegal for 
tenants to leave their farms. But probably his edict only 
gave legal recognition to a situation which already ex- 
isted. In earlier times tenants had been inclined to retain 
their holdings, the renewal of leases was probably taken 
for granted, and tenancies descended from father to son. 
As for the conductor also, some time after the third century, 
he ceased to take a sa/tus for a fixed period, but settled on 
it for life, became its practical owner, and bequeathed it 
to his heir*. It was ruinous for him to have frequent 
changes in his tenants, or to have his land pass out of 
cultivation, and this he prevented. When this point had 
been reached, the co/onus had become a serf. 


1 For the history of extra-territoriality, which seems to be of eastern 
origin, cf. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 375 ff. 
2 For a few instances of the development of vici of tenants into civitates, 
cf. Pelham, Essays, 298. 3 Cf. pp. 129 f. 
4 Rostowzew, op. cit. 396 ff. 
[ 20 ] 


CH Apis Benet) 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 
| N the early history of Greece the union of villages and 


cities (ouvvoxucpos) had led to the grouping of a large 

number of tribes (€6vn) in city-states. These became 
the political centres of the groups, although a large part 
of the population remained in the original villages and 
retained some form of administration in the management 
of local affairs, such as games and religious festivals?. 
Occasionally we find some political legislation, as, for 
example, in the Mesogaea of Attica where, in the third 
century, certain demes united to protect their lands 
against raids?. When Demetrius founded Demetrias by 
the union of neighboring cities and villages, the former 
of these, as demes of the new town, still retained a local 
assembly and local magistrates, although the sovereignty 
which they possessed must have been limited®. In some 
of the more backward districts of Greece, such as Aetolia, 
Arcadia, and Epirus, villages existed with an independent 
organization, and were not attached to any city. The 
records of such communities, however, have not been pre- 
served*, In Thrace the tribal organization was governed 
by a phylarch. The people lived in villages, several of 
which sometimes united in a xowov, whose chief magis- 
trates were called comarchs®. In this province we also 
find toparchies, which seem to have had a central govern- 
ment modelled on that of the Greek city ®. 


1 Dict. Dar. s.v. coun; Kuhn, Die Entstehung der Stadt, 188 f.; R.E. 


5.0. KO.TOLKiO, KOLN. 
2 Ferguson, Hellenistic Athens, 207. 
3 Ath. Mitt. 14 (1889), 196 ff. 
4 Dict. Dar. s.v. noun; Kuhn, op. cit. 24 ff, 79 ff. 
5 Cagnat, (GRR. 1, 721, 728. «No. r3ri 


[ ar ] 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


Villages sometimes developed independently into cities, 
or were detached by force from the municipality, and con- 
stituted as independent communities. A case like the 
dispersion of Mantinea by Agesilaus was rare’. Mantinea 
and Corinth were, for a time, made villages of Argos as 
a result of war?, but, in general, the loss of civic status 
by a municipality was due to economic weakness, especi- 
ally in Hellenistic and Roman times. 

In Asia Greek culture had not penetrated beyond the 
maritime regions before the conquests of Alexander, and 
the interior of the Persian kingdom was almost entirely 
composed of village-communities. Under Roman rule we 
find these organizations still existing in various forms. 
Such names as O7H0s, KOU, KWPOTOALS, pNTpoKopia, 
TOMO PA, TEpLouKts, TOALXVN, TOiXvLoV, KATOLKIG, KTOWG: 
TOTOS, XOpa, X@ptor, su Tone Epuua, PpovpLov, TUpyos, 
and tetyos are common. To these might be added 
Stationes, regiones, and mansiones which came in under 
Roman administration, In inscriptions dnmos, Keun, and 
Katoukia are the terms usually applied to villages®. 

Under Roman rule village-communities which were 
not under the control of a municipality might be found on 
private or imperial estates, or under the control of priests 
in a temple-state, or grouped in a sort of commonwealth 
(kowov or émapxia) whose administrative centre was a 
PyTpokwpia. Since the Romans followed the Greek policy 
of extending the municipal organization wherever possible, 


1 Xenophon, Hellenica, 5.2.7. For the dispersion of Phocian towns by 
the Amphictyonic Council in 346, see Diodorus, 16. 60. 2. 

2 Plutarch, 4ratus, 45; Xenophon, op. cit. 4. 4. 6. 

3 ‘These terms are found constantly in Strabo. 

4 Kuhn, Die stadt. u. birgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2, 238, 317 n. 
The development of military cazadae into municipalities is not common in 
the Orient. Leggin in Syria probably took its name from the military 
camp established in the town Caparcotna (RZ. Mus. 58 (1903), 633). Cf. 
Briinnow, Prov. Arab. 2. 24 ff. 

5 For the distinction between kw and xartorxia, cf. Chapot, La prov. 
rom. proc. a’ Asie, 97 f. RE. 5.0. karoukia. 


[ 22 ] 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


many of these villages were transformed into cities. The 
pnTpoKwpia usually became the metropolis and the de- 
pendent districts formed the serritorium of the new city. 
In founding Zela, Pompey added to its territory several 
eparchies!. The temple-states, which were a characteristic 
organization in Asia, were composed of groups of villages 
under the administration of the priests attached to the 
temple. Although the residents in these communities 
were usually Aierot or hierodoulot, whose status was vir- 
tually serfdom, some form of political organization was 
probably permitted. The temple-states were deprived 
of their power either by the Greek kings or by the Roman 
rulers, and the seat of the temple usually became the civic 
centre, while the estate was converted into the territorium 
of the city. The worship of the god became the civic cult. 
Some of these temple-states were added to the estates of 
the emperors’. In Judea the destruction of Jerusalem 
brought an end to the power of the temple as an adminis- 
trative factor in the control of the Jewish villages. 

On the imperial estates the agent of the emperor was 
probably the administrator of the smaller communities, 
where the tenants were chiefly serfs. In the larger villages 
there was a quasi-municipal organization which probably 
developed as a result of the settlement of free tenants who 
formed the nucleus of a curia, or it arose from a collegium 
of residents formed for social or religious purposes. The 
development of political institutions seems to have been 
encouraged, for many of the imperial estates were incor- 
porated as municipal ¢erritoria. A good example of this 
may be seen in the inscription from Pogla which shows the 
two stages of its development?#. 

Since the Romans were eager to extend the municipal 
system over the provinces as soon as possible, many of the 


1 Strabo, 12. 37. I. 

2 Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, 1, 1023 Strabo, 12. 3. 13 12. 34-37. 
3 Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 276 ff. 

MNO ULe2 fins 32. 


Bese s 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


new cities founded by them were given territory of vast 
extent. In the course of time many of the larger villages 
within the serritorium were given municipal charters of 
their own. Tymanda may be cited as an example of this 
development, and Orcistus, which had once been a city 
before it was reduced to the status of a village under the 
jurisdiction of Nacoleia, was restored to its former status 
in the fourth century1. ‘The process of development and 
decay may be traced in different parts of the empire at all 
periods. Ilium had degenerated into a sort of village- 
town (xwpdmonus) before it was restored by the emperors?. 
Strabo describes Chrysopolis as a village in his day?. 
Byzantium and Antioch were penalized by the emperors 
for political reasons and were deprived of civic rights for 
a time by being made villages of neighboring cities*. The 
large number of cities named Hierapolis shows how the 
temple-states were transformed into municipalities, and 
among the seats of Christian bishoprics such names as 
Chorio Myliadica, Agathe Come, Demulycaon, Panemo- 
teichus, Regepodandus, Chora Patrimonia, Ktema Maxi- 
mianopoleos, and Salton Toxus may serve to illustrate the 
development of cities out of villages, of which some were 
originally part of an imperial estate5. Constantine is 
credited with great activity in transforming villages into 
cities, and all emperors encouraged this policy in order to 
create a body of curiales who would be responsible for the 
collection of imperial taxes ®, 

In distinguishing between a village and a city, ancient 
writers imply that the former possessed no _ political 
sovereignty, but it is evident that most villages had some 
form of organization whereby the members could legislate 


1 Nos. 151, 154. 4 Strabo, tauedk, 

3 Strabo, 12. 42. 2; Cicero, ad fam. 4. 5. 4. 

4 Herodian, 3. 6. 9. 

® Ramsay, op. cit. 1. 84 7.3 Kuhn, op. cit. 238-9, 289, 299, 301, 304, 
368; no. 122. 

8 Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 1. 18; cf. nos. 151, 154. 


[ 24 | 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


in social, religious, and administrative matters, however 
much their freedom in initiative and performance may 
have been restricted. Many communities copied their 
metropolis by adopting civic institutions, such as the 
ecclesia and gerousia. Sometimes a group of villages united 
in a xowvov for the celebration of festivals and games!. We 
find frequent records of honorary decrees passed by village- 
assemblies, and of public works undertaken at their ex- 
pense*. They had revenues under their control, some of 
which came from lands which they owned and could dis- 
pose of by sale?. They had advocates (€kdixor) to defend 
their interests, and judges to administer the law*. Officials 
such as comarch, demarch, brabeutae, logistae, prytaneis, 
recorders (avaypadets), agoranomi, secretary, and ot 
Baowdevovres are found, and even the summa honoraria is 
sometimes exacted®. In Syrian villages mention is made 
of cutvdiKol, miotol, Sto“KNTal, mpovonrat, oTpaTnyotl, 
and émuednrai®. We cannot tell whether the officials in 
the villages were elected locally or were appointed by the 
municipal government. According to the Codes the 
government of villages and mansiones in the fourth century 
was entrusted to citizens as a municipal liturgy’. It is 
doubtful if this system was universal, since Syrian in- 
scriptions and the statements of Libanius imply that the 
village-officials were independent of the municipal govern- 

1 Dict. Dar. s.v. won. 

2 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 692, 13973 4, 756, 1367; Ramsay, op. cif. no. 498. 
Juristic Bae recognized by law, cf. Dig. 3. 4. 13 30. 1. 733 47. 22. 43 


Gods Fine 5x2. 
Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1387, 1607; Lebas-Waddington, 2556; Ditt. 
Or. Gr. 488. eile kb aa ge 


5 Cf. indices to Lebas-Waddington, Cagnat, JGRR, and JG. The como- 
grammateus of Judaean villages shows the persistence of Ptolemaic in- 
fluence. In Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1371 of Bacidevovres imply the priest- 
kings of a temple-state. For the summa honoraria, cf. no. 150 and Fourz. 
Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff. 

8 Lebas-Waddington, 2127, 2130, 2240, 2399, 2547, 2556; Prentice, 
Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 43 (1912), 113 ff. 

Made RTS) 211355 )3 Cog pmtonge. a. 


[ 25 ] 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


ment1, It is evident that, in the disorder which prevailed 
during the third and fourth centuries, villages distant 
from the metropolis and unprotected by it had either 
fortified themselves and become semi-independent, or had 
placed themselves under the protection of some powerful 
noble, to whom they gave their full allegiance. The 
development of this type of patronage was an important 
cause of the decline of municipal institutions, since great 
stretches of territory passed out of the control of the cities, 
especially when brigandage and war were factors of every- 
day life. In the Byzantine empire the spread of indepen- 
dent village-communities was a characteristic feature of 
the revival of oriental influences and the decay of Hellen- 
ism, although their development was also due in large 
measure to the peculiar political and economic conditions 
of the age?. | 

The relation of the village to the metropolis in financial 
matters cannot be traced in detail, since few documents 
throw light on the subject. The revenues of the city were 
chiefly derived from the ¢erritorium, and the villagers were, 
in effect, regarded as lessees in perpetuity of the lands 
which they worked. The rental which they paid not only 
contributed to the support of the municipality, but also 
helped to make up the quota of imperial tribute. Other 
requisitions, such as the head and house tax, were levied °. 
Villagers, drafted for the settlement of the emporium at 
Pizus, were granted exemption from the quota of grain 
usually demanded from the villages, from the tax for the 
support of the 4urgarii or border police, and from garrison 
duty. No levies could be imposed upon them for beasts 
of burden required for the public post*. The recruiting 
tax (aurum tironicum) was levied on villages as well as on 
towns in the third century, but we cannot determine 

1 Libanius, De patrociniis. 
2 Ramsay, Tekmorian Guest Friends, 306 ff. 


3 Cicero, ad fam. 3. 8.5; Cod. Th. 11. 24. 6. 
BAN Gin s C4 


[ 26 ] 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


whether the municipality collected it, or whether imperial 
agents enforced the payment!. Valens imposed the tax 
directly on the villages?. In Hierapolis the municipal 
police (7apadvdAaxes), who were assigned to guard-duty in 
the country districts, were not allowed to make requisitions 
upon the villagers except for certain specified require- 
ments*, It would seem that every imperial tax and liturgy 
imposed upon the municipality was passed on to the de- 
pendent communities, while a few more were added by the 
civic authorities as a special act of grace. The plaint that 
every curialis was a tyrant was probably not unjustified. 
Above all, the imperial requisitions for service in the 
public post were applied directly to the villages. The 
drafting of their cattle for angary was particularly burden- 
some on farmers. Frequent complaints from villages on 
imperial estates happen to be preserved, since they pre- 
sented their wrongs to the emperor direct and were able 
to secure some relief, but the municipal serritoria must 
have suffered far more from the exactions of troops and 
imperial officials*. Since the cities were unable to protect 
the country districts, the villagers were forced to turn for 
help to the powerful proprietors in their vicinity, and 
where this protection could not be secured, their im- 
poverishment was only a question of time. 

In Egypt the Ptolemaic system was perpetuated for the 
first two centuries of Roman rule. The country was organ- 
ized in nomes composed of village-communities, each 
with a metropolis which, by courtesy, was often called a 
awodus. Lhe village is usually styled képuy, but such terms 
as émoukia, émouKiov, ywpiov, and rézos are also found?. 
The chief official (kwpoypapparevs) was an agent of the 


1 No. 150; Fourn. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff. 

2 Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 4. 34. eNO TT '7. 

4 Nos. 113, 139, 141-144, 152. 

5 Musée Belge, 10 (1906), 38 f., 160 f7.; Engers, De Aegyptiarum kwpov 
administratione qualis fuerit aetate Lagidarum; Wilcken, Grundziige, c. 1; 
Jouguet, Vie munic. 202 ff. 


[ 27 ] 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


imperial government, and sometimes combined two or 
more villages under his jurisdiction4. Police duties were 
under the supervision of the archephodus and phylaces of 
various kinds?. The office of epistates seems to have dis- 
appeared soon after the Roman occupation 3. The board or 
council of elders (rtpeoBvrepor) acted with the secretary 
as the governing body. In this capacity the councillors 
had no initiative of their own, but served merely as agents 
of the imperial government. Their responsibility was 
fixed by law, and the proper performance of their duties 
was guaranteed by sureties*. Each member of the board 
had to possess a certain standard of wealth which varied 
according to the importance of the village®. Nominations 
to office were made by the secretary and elders, sometimes 
jointly, sometimes separately. The appointments were 
made by the epistrategus®. The larger villages were some- 
times divided into wards, each of which had officials of its 
own. 

The religious and administrative centre of each nome 
was called a metropolis, and its organization differed from 
the villages but slightly. The council of elders was re- 
placed by a council of magistrates (kowdv Tov apydvTov) 
as a concession to the Greek element which had settled 
in the community. The magistracies have been classified 
in three grades as follows: (1) gymnasiarch, (2) exegete, 
cosmete, eutheniarch, (3) archiereus, agoranomus’. The 
hypomnematographus rarely appears in the records, and his 
official rank is a matter of dispute®. Some of these offices 
were shared by several persons. There were at least six, 
and probably twelve, gymnasiarchs, but the variation in 

1 BGU. 91, 163; P. Fay. 40; P. Fi. 8; Jouguet, op. cit. 269 ff. 

2 Jouguet, op. cit. 261 ff. 

3 Oertel, Die Liturgie, 385; Jouguet, op. cit. 259. 

4 Jouguet, op. cit. 231; nos. 172, 182, 187, 196. 

5 Jouguet, op. cit. 219 f.; Wilcken, Gr. Ostraka, 506 ff.; P. Giess. 58. 
6 Jouguet, op. cit. 222 ff. 

’ Preisigke, Sradtisches Beamtenwesen im rimischen Agypten, 30 ff.; 
Jouguet, op. cit. 292 ff. 8 POs Are: 


[ 28 ] 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


numbers was regulated by the size of the community and 
its prosperity at different periods. There were two annual 
secretaries who acted as imperial agents!. They drew up 
the list of candidates for the manifold liturgies, probably 
in consultation with the board of magistrates. They also 
nominated their successors in office. The method of ap- 
pointment to magistracies cannot be definitely determined 
for all periods. As a general rule, however, the outgoing 
officials nominated their successors?. 

At the beginning of the third century Severus intro- 
duced several reforms in the administration of Egypt. A 
senate was constituted in each metropolis of the nomes. In 
form each of these towns became a municipality, and its 
later history need not concern us in this study. The 
villages of the nome, however, were not included in the 
territorium of the city at first. They continued to be ad- 
ministered by the state, although the nomarch was 
appointed by the municipal senate which acted merely 
as an agent of the imperial government in the nome?. 
The villages were also placed under a different adminis- 
tration, for the comogrammateus and the elders disappear 
from the records before the middle of the century4. They 
were replaced by comarchs who seem to have been 
associated with other officials in a council®, The comarchs 
nominated the sitologi, ephorus, quadrarius, and other local 
officials, and were responsible for the proper discharge 
of the duties to which the nominees were assigned. In 
the fourth century the nome was divided into pagi, which 
were now included in the territory of the city and under its 
jurisdiction®, 

The Egyptian village was originally a part of the estate 


1 Jouguet, op. cit. 291. aS No, 181. 

3 Wilcken, Gr. Ostraka, 625; Jouguet, op. cit. 387, 390; cf. however, 
no. 200. 

4 Jouguet, op. cit. 214,f. 5 [bid. 393. 

6 Gelzer, Studien zur byzantinischen Verwaltung Agyptens, 57 ff-3 
cf. however, Jouguet, op. cit. 397. 


[ 29 ] 


VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT 


of the emperor, and it was organized and exploited solely 
in the interest of the fiscus. Here the liturgy was developed 
in its most oppressive form}, and here the peasant was 
first bound to the soil. The development of municipal 
government in the third century, which we have described 
elsewhere, was powerfully influenced by the methods of 
administration which prevailed in the village-communities 


in Egypt. 


1 We have omitted a discussion of the Egyptian liturgy here. Cf. pp. 
99/7. and especially the comprehensive work by Oertel, Die Liturgie. 


ON] 


CHAPTER IV 


VREVSAT TU SIN GAs DAM AN, Duk GY IPT: 


HE Greek cities in Asia, under the Diadochi, were 

allowed the right of ownership of land within their 
own zerritoria, but, unless especially exempted, they 

were required to pay to the king a tax on property under 
their jurisdiction! The remainder of the royal dominions 
consisted of crown-lands, which could either be leased or 
worked by royal agents with slave or free labor, or by 
tenants who paid a tithe of their produce to the king. 
These tenants held their leaseholds in hereditary suc- 
cession, and, in case the land was sold, they passed with 
the property into the possession of the new owner. They 
were grouped in villages (karoukiot, Kamat, Or ywpia), 
where they enjoyed a limited measure of political activity. 
The royal estates were frequently reduced in extent by 
the foundation of military colonies, by the grant of civic 
status to villages, by sale, or by gift?. When the king 
transferred his right of possession to another, the land was 
usually included within the territory of the city in which 
the new owner resided. Hereditary tenants, therefore, 
were not peculiar to the royal possessions, but were often 
found on the lands belonging to the cities, or on private 
estates within their bounds. Such was the system of land 
tenure which the Romans found in Asia, and it is apparent 
that they adopted it with slight change. The crown-lands 
became the ager publicus of Rome and the cities retained 
possession of their territory, for which they paid rental in 
the form of an annual tribute to Rome. The Roman 


1 The history of land tenure on the royal and imperial estates of Asia is 
summed up by Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 229 ff. Cf. R.E. 5.0, 
Domdnen. 

2 Rostowzew, op. cit. 248 f7. Cf. Buckler and Robinson, 474. 16 
(1912), 11 ff 


Rati k OS 


THE, SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT 


governors followed the policy of the Hellenistic kings in 
extending the municipal system at the expense of the 
public lands as well as of the temple-states. This move- 
ment was doubtless favored by the pudbficani since it 
simplified the problem of tax-gathering and facilitated 
the collection of loans!. 

Under the empire, the private estates of the emperor 
and the ager publicus came ultimately under the same 
administration. The imperial possessions were augmented 
by confiscation, fines, and bequests. As the kingdoms of 
client princes came into the empire, many of the royal 
estates were added to those of the emperor, while others 
were devoted to the foundation of cities. Fortunately, the 
tendency to over-expansion in the imperial estates was 
counterbalanced by the policy of extending the municipal 
system as widely as possible. The inscription from Pogla 
shows the transition from a village on one of the estates 
to municipal rank, and the names of the early Christian 
bishoprics indicate that many of them had once been 
imperial property?. 

Little is known of the actual methods of administration 
of the Asiatic imperial estates. We have, however, traced 
elsewhere the details of the western organization, and, 
since the latter was probably borrowed from the East, we 
refer the reader to the description of the western sa/tus*. 
The tenants were largely of the class of hereditary serfs, 
although we also find records of citizens from the muni- 
cipalities who held imperial leaseholds*. The position of 
imperial tenants was probably more favorable than that of 
landowners in the towns since the former were assured of 
imperial protection, and were free from the oppressive 
municipal liturgies. With the development of imperial 
liturgies, however, the inhabitants of the villages on the 


1 Rostowzew, op. cit. 277 ff.3 cf. no. 14. 
CLINGS 25h oh > GS, PPT 5s 
4 Ramsay, The Tekmorian Guest Friends, 361 ff. Cf. no. 142. 


ie eA 


THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT 


estates of the emperor were subjected to these charges, 
and in the third century we have several records of their 
complaints against the exactions of soldiers and officials!. 

When a municipal charter was granted to a village on 
an imperial estate, some change must have been made in 
the status of the residents. The free tenants would naturally 
form the nucleus of the senate, and the imperial agents 
may have become the first magistrates of the new town. 
Of the hereditary tenants, some continued to hold the 
position of serfs on the public lands of the city, but the 
more wealthy were undoubtedly raised to the rank of free 
citizens in order to create a sufficient number of curiales 
who would be responsible for the various obligations of 
the municipality. Unfortunately, no evidence has been 
preserved which enables us to determine definitely these 
points, but inscriptions from Asiatic towns sometimes 
reveal that the population was divided into classes of 
different status?. The lower grades may represent the 
original stock or the class of hereditary serfs. 

In order to understand fully the Roman administration 
of Egypt, it is necessary to describe briefly the system of 
land tenure under the Ptolemies?. With the exception of 
the few cities which were founded by them, the Nile 
valley was the personal property of the sovereign. The 
crown lands (yj Baowdixy) were under the direct adminis- 
tration of the Toyal bureaus. The remainder was called y7 
ev adéoe or ‘‘surrendered”’ land. 

The ‘‘surrendered’’ land may be subdivided as sacred 
(tepa), military (xkAnpovyiKy), and private (idvdxryTOos). 
Royal agents administered the sacred assignments in the 
interests of the temples*. The cleruchic land was assigned 
to the soldiers and to certain members of the bureaucracy. 


1 Nos. 139, 141-144. 

2 Liebenam, St. Verw. 216 ff.; no. 122. 

3 Cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 1 ff; Wilcken, Grundzige, 270 ff.; Bell, 
Fournal of Egyptian Archaeology, 4 (1917), 86 f. 

4 Wilcken, op. cit. 278 ff. 


AMA [ 33 ] 3 


THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT 


The lessees, who were usually Greeks, were under obliga- 
tion to render military service when called upon, and to 
pay a small ground rent. In making these grants the 
Ptolemies had a double purpose in view. The Greek 
soldiers were given a stake in their new home, and the 
cultivated area of the Nile valley was extended, for the 
military leases usually covered lands technically classified 
as sterile (bwddoyor, yépoos), and the lessee was under 
obligation to cultivate his holdings. The lease could be 
cancelled at the will of the king, but the lessee had the 
right to sublet his property, and it could pass to his heirs 
as a virtual inheritance!. Land “‘surrendered”’ to private 
individuals (y7 idudKrynTos) consisted of two main classes: 
(1) Vineyards and orchards called «rjpara. These hold- 
ings are generally supposed to represent property privately 
owned in Persian times, or new land brought under 
cultivation by the owner. (2) Lands held on hereditary 
leasehold which could be bought, sold, mortgaged, or 
bequeathed with the same freedom as if held in full 
private ownership. The ‘‘surrendered”’ land was taxed 
with an annual rental to the crown, and if the tenant fell 
into arrears in his rental, his lease was liable to confisca- 
tion®. There was also another class which might properly 
be included under private ownership: favorites of the king 
were often given grants (yy év dwpea), on which no rental 
was imposed. 

The greater part of Egypt and the most fertile soil was 
crown land (yy Baowduxr), which was worked by royal 
tenants (yewpyot Bacdtxot). The leases ran for a term of 
years (usually five), and were granted to the highest bidder 
at public auction. The lessees were under oath not to leave 
their holdings between seed-time and harvest. In this 
arrangement we may find the beginning of the system 
which was later to bind the tenants to the soil as were the 
royal serfs of Asia. While the interests of his tenants were 


1 Wilcken, op. cit. 280 ff. 2 Op. cit. 284 ff. 
[ 34 ] 


THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT 


safeguarded by the king, they were subjected to unusual 
burdens in times of economic stress, and were often com- 
pelled to take over leases against their will. In some cases 
they even resorted to flight to escape their obligations!. 

Under Roman rule the “‘surrendered’’ land dis- 
appeared as a separate class, and in its place we find land 
which was held in complete private possession(y7 iduwruK7, 
YR KaTOLKLKH, yn KAnpovyiKy, and ovoiar). The public 
lands fell into two great categories: the Adyos SiovKycews 
(including the Yn BaowtKh, yy Onpocta, yn Lepa, and 
probably the yy wpoaddov), and the Adyos otavakds. The 
royal lands were leased under the same conditions as 
before. The “public” lands (yy Syuwoota) cannot be dis- 
tinguished from the royal lands except in details of ad- 
ministration?. The term dypocior yewpyot came to be 
applied to tenants on both crown and public lands. 
The sacred lands were very materially diminished by the 
Romans?. The confiscated properties were added to the 
imperial possessions, while the remainder was administered 
by imperial agents in the interest of the temples. In the 
third century the temples seem to have been brought under 
the control of the local senate in each metropolis, and the 
sacred lands gradually passed into the municipal serrito- 
rium. ‘The “‘revenue”’ lands (yn mpooddov) appear as a 
new class under Roman rule, and their characteristics 
cannot be clearly determined. Rostowzew believes that 
they represent sequestered property which remained in 
the hands of the original owner until the obligations to the 
state were discharged’. Meanwhile the land formed a 
special class, and the revenue went to a special division 
of the imperial bureaus. 

The yn ovavaxy consisted largely of estates which had 
once been held by members of the imperial family, 
favorites, or friends in the senatorial and equestrian order, 


1 Wilcken, op. cit. 272 ff. 2 Op. cit. 288 ff. 3 Op. cit. 300 ff. 
4 Rostowzew, op. cit. 135 7. Gf. Wilcken, op. cit. 296 ff. 


[ 35 ] 3-2 


THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT 


and had probably been free of any tax or rental. In the 
course of the first century these estates came into the 
possession of the emperors, and constituted a curious sort 
of imperial patrimony within Egypt, which as a whole 
was regarded as a personal possession of the crown!. 
While the y7 otcvaxy was under the administration of a 
separate bureau (Adyos ovovakds), the tenants, known as 
yewpyot ovovaxol, seem to have received the same treat- 
ment as those on public property. The pucdwrat ovovakoi 
are also found as tenants, apparently with the same status 
as the yewpyot, although it is believed that their leases 
were for fixed periods and were assigned to the less valu- 
able land. Such leaseholds could be sublet, but the 
sublessees were directly responsible to the imperial agents 
from whom also they received the right of taking over the 
lease. 

The administration of Egypt as an imperial domain was 
under the control of a prefect assisted by an elaborate 
bureaucracy*. Apart from the Greek cities, the whole Nile 
valley was divided into three administrative districts over 
each of which an epistrategus exercised authority as the 
deputy of the prefect. These districts were again divided 
into nomes under the supervision of a strategus. The nomes 
were divided into toparchies in which were the villages. 
The administrative centre of each nome was the metropolis. 
The organization of the village-communities and the 
metropolis has been described elsewhere®. Here we need 
only recall the fact that the officials of the villages acted 
as agents of the bureaucracy rather than as servants of the 
community. Corporate liability was early recognized and 
enforced*. ‘The community as a whole was liable for the 
default of any of its members, and in some cases the village 
was compelled to take over leaseholds which had been 
vacated, or for which no tenant had bidden at the official 
auctions. 


1 Rostowzew, op. cit. 119 ff. 2 Wilcken, op. cit. 28 ff. 
3° Ch pp.27 ts 4 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 345 


[36 


THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT 


One of the most noteworthy features of the Roman 
administration of Egypt was the growth of private owner- 
ship of land. The descendants of the soldiers of the 
Ptolemies were no longer subject to military service and 
the cleruchic land, in so far as it had not been confiscated 
by Augustus, passed into the private possession of the 
former occupants!. The catoecic lands were also treated 
in the same way. Both paid an annual tax to the bureaus. 
Thus there was created a large class of landowners with 
small holdings. The development of the liturgical system 
probably had decisive influence in the new policy. Litur- 
gies could not be imposed upon a citizen unless he owned 
property which could be held as surety for the proper 
discharge of his obligations, and the Romans doubtless 
found that tenants could evade their responsibilities more 
easily than owners. Private ownership must have been 
common when the municipal organization was extended 
to the metropolis of each nome in a.p. 202. In the fourth 
century the yn Baowdtuxy and the yn dypocia disappear 
from the records. These lands either became the property 
of private individuals who were given possession under an 
obligation to cultivate them, or they had been incorporated 
in the territory of the municipalities. 

As the economic pressure increased in Egypt, it became 
more and more difficult to find tenants for the imperial 
lands. Two solutions of the problem were attempted. 
Compulsory tenantry was adopted, which led to the 
development of serfdom. In some cases tenants were 
arbitrarily transferred to abandoned districts from profit- 
able holdings, in the hope that successful farmers might be 
able to reclaim the exhausted land?. The second device 
was the principle of adiectio(émuBody). This was a form of 
compulsory leasehold, whereby lands, for which no tenants 
had applied, were arbitrarily assigned to private owners, or 
to tenants on the imperial estates, or even to the villages 


1 Bell, Joc. cit. 89 ff. 2 Wilcken, Grundziige, 293 /f. 
yey) Al 


THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT 


as corporate communities!. As a rental was imposed, the 
unwilling lessee was obliged to cultivate the land in some 
fashion. In a few cases we find records of leases which 
specified ‘‘that the land was free from the obligation to 
cultivate royal or public lands,” and where this clause does 
not appear it is probable that the liability to adiectio was 
implied?. ; 

In a narrow sense, the history of Egypt under Roman 
rule may be viewed as a struggle for supremacy between 
two systems of administration; the bureaucratic imperial 
estate versus the municipal organization. The victory 
rested, though only in name, with the latter, since the 
imperial estates were gradually merged in the municipal 
territorium, but in fact the city became a mere instrument 
in the hands of the bureaucracy and functioned solely as 
an agent of the imperial government. This development 
and its influence on the cities in other parts of the empire 
are subjects treated elsewhere®. The failure of the Romans 
to carry out the system of the Ptolemies is due to a variety 
of causes. Egypt was too remote from the capital, and 
the natives were exploited by the official class. ‘The tribute 
imposed upon the country exhausted its resources. De- 
population and abandonment of the less fertile areas 
followed. Finally, the exaction of imperial requisitions 
and the development of the liturgical system resulted in 
the restraint of personal liberty and reduced the population 
to political and economic serfdom+. 


1 Wilcken, op. ciz. 292; Zulueta, de patrociniis vicorum, 43. 
2 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 355-359. 


° Cf. pp. 194 f7- ee 
4 For the development of the principle of origo in Egypt, cf. nos. 168, 


175, 192, 193 and pp. 194, 217 ff. 


[. Sa 


CHAPTER V 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES 
AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE 


E have tried to classify communities in the Roman 
\ \ | empire according to their origin, character, and 
juridical relation to Rome or to other cities. It 
is convenient to group them also on the basis of their 
freedom from the payment of tribute, or their obligation to 
pay it. From 89 B.c. to the time of Diocletian Italy was 
free from this charge!, but from land outside Italy a 
rental in kind (decumae), or a fixed sum of money (stipen- 
dium or tributum) was expected. Exemption from this pay- 
ment could be had only as a privilege. We find, therefore, 
in the provinces two classes of communities, civitates 
stipendiariae and civitates immunes, or, to use for the second 
class the term more commonly employed in antiquity, 
civitates liberae et immunes. The circumstances which often 
led Rome to grant freedom or exemption from taxation to 
a city are illustrated in the case of Utica which assisted 
Rome in the third Punic war?. For asimilar reason Antony 
made Laodicea a civitas libera et immunis, because of the 
sturdy resistance which it had offered to Cassius in 
43 B.c.2 Sometimes the fortunate city owed its privileges 
to the generosity of the Roman people, as Delphi did4, or 
to the favor of a Roman general, as in the case of Aphro- 
disias°. 


1 Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 177 ff. 

2 Appian, Puz. 75, 135; cf. CIL. 1, 200, 1. 75. 
8 Appian, B.C. 4. 6235: 7. 

4 Cf. Henze, De civitatibus liberis, 34. 
SeChtienze,.on. cls igziy 


[Asous 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES 


The recognition of a community as a free city usually 
carried along with it exemption from the payment of 
tribute, but under the republic the free cities were not 
always safe from the imposition of taxes at the hands of 
greedy governors or needy generals?, and under the early 
empire cities made ‘‘free”’ did not necessarily have even a 
technical claim to immunity from taxation’. However, in 
the great majority of cases in both periods it is probable 
that cities of this class enjoyed the privilege mentioned, 
so that in a particular instance, when evidence to the con- 
trary is not available, it is wise to take it for granted that 
a free city was immunis. 

Freedom might be granted to a city by a treaty, in 
which case the city bore the title of a civitas foederata?, 
or in the second place it might come through a 
law, or through a decree of the senate. Cities of the 
latter sort were called civitates sine foedere liberae et im- 
munes. Vhe rights of these two classes of communities 


1 It is important to notice that cities which are styled free by the ancient 
historians are sometimes not technically civitates Liberae."Thus, for instance, 
Flamininus in 196 B.c. declared (cf. Livy, 33. 32. 5-6) the Corinthians 
and certain other peoples free, because they were released from the domina- 
tion of Philip, but this action did not make them civitates liberae (cf. Henze, 
op. cit. 2). The term avrovopio, used in the East, must also be distin- 
guished from /idertas. It indicates the granting to a city of the privilege suis 
legibus uti (cf. Mommsen, St. R. 3, 724), but these laws may be adminis- 
tered under the supervision of Roman magistrates. 

2 Cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 1, 72, n. 13 Henze, op. cit. 4. 

8 ‘This seems to have been true, for instance, of Magnesia and Sipylum, 
Chios and Apollonidea (cf: Mommsen, S+t. R. 3, 683, n. 4; 682, n. 3). 

4 The fact that Pliny in his lists characterizes only a few free cities as 
civitates immunes does not prove that many others were not free from the 
payment of tribute (cf: Mommsen, 8+. R. 3, 683, n. 4). 

5 ‘This term is used in its technical sense only once in the Latin inscrip- 
tions, but it is frequent in literature; cf. Diz. Ep. 2, 255 f. To the list of 
civitates foederatae given by Marquardt (St. Verw. 1, 75 f.) Kabbadias 
has recently added ‘T'roezen (cf. JG. 1v, 791), Thurreium of Acarnania 
(cf. IG. 1x, 483), and Epidaurus (cf. "Ed. “Apx. 1918, 166 7.). The 
term socit was a purely honorary title, and did not imply a treaty nor 
the possession of special rights; cf. Henze, op. cit. 6. 


[ 40 | 


AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE 


were essentially the same, but the privileges of a federated 
city were based upon a treaty, and, therefore, irrevocable}, 
whereas a law or a decree of the senate, upon which the 
claims of cities of the second class were based, could be 
repealed at the will of the Roman people or senate?. 
Reference is frequently made to the treaties into which 
Rome had entered with other cities, but none of the treaties 
has been preserved in its entirety®. Almost all of them, 
so far as we can determine their dates, belong to the period 
of the republic*. Evidently, as time went on, Rome be- 
came less generous than she had been in earlier days in 
granting rights in perpetuity. Her early acts of generosity 
had come out of a grateful recognition of services rendered 
in times of great peril. Then too these favors granted to 
her supporters and her stern treatment of hostile cities 
would serve to show in future wars what friend and foe 


1 Occasionally the Romans did not observe the sanctity of these treaties. 
Suetonius writes (4ug. 47): urbium quasdam, foederatas sed ad exitium 
licentia praecipites, libertate privavit. From Cassius Dio, 54. 7. 6, Cyzicus, 
Tyre, and Sidon would seem to be the cities concerned. Rhodes and Malaca 
were at one time federated cities. Later they lost this status. Perhaps they 
were thought to have denounced the treaty with Rome, when they took sides 
against her. 

2 An interesting commentary on the uncertain position of the civitates 
sine foedere seems to be furnished by the statement of Suetonius concerning 
the exceptional good fortune of the people of Ilium. Of them he says: 
Iliensibus quasi Romanae gentis auctoribus, tributa iz perpetuum remisit 
(Claud. 25). 

3 Such references may be seen in Livy, 38. 8. 10 and Tac. Azz. 2. 53. 
For fragments of the treaty with Astypalaea, cf. Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 
p. 42, no. 21 and Rhein. Mus. 44 (1889), 446. 

4 £.g. the treaty with Massilia is perhaps as early as 389 B.c. (cf. Justin, 
43. 5. 10); that with the Vocontii is known in the first century B.c. (CJL. 
XII, p. 160); the treaties with ‘Tauromenium and Neaetum are mentioned 
by Cicero (iz Verr. 2. 1603 3. 13 and ibid. 5. 56; 5. 133); the treaty with 
Rhodes grew out of the war with Perseus (Livy, 45. 25. 7), and the treaty 
with Astypalaea belongs to the year 104 B.c. The treaty with Aphrodisias 
(cf. no. 29) is also of the republican period. Perhaps an example of a treaty, 
made under the empire, conferring the rights of a free city, exists in the case 


of Tyrus (Henze, op. cit. 76). 
[41 ] 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES 


might expect from her. With the world at her feet, she 
had no more crises to face. 

The lex Antonia de Termessibus of 71 B.c. gives us a 
typical specimen of a plebiscite establishing a free city, 
and there is a decree of the senate with the same object in 
view in the case of Stratonicea!. The initiative in granting 
this privilege was frequently taken by some successful 
general or by the emperor?. 

The rights of free cities, whether guaranteed by a treaty 
with Rome or granted in a law or in a decree of the senate, 
were liable to cancellation or abridgment on the ground 
that the cities had broken faith with Rome or had not been 
loyal to her. On the other hand, a city sometimes regained 
its lost rights, or the privileges of a free city were con- 
ferred on a community which previously had lacked them. 
Thus Tyre was free under the republic, lost its freedom - 
under Augustus, but regained it later+. Mitylene had the 
right of receiving exiles in Cicero’s time® and was, there- 
fore, probably free, lost its privileges, apparently in the 
first Mithradatic war®, but received them later again at 
the hands of Pompey’. The people of Locri Ozolae seem 
to have been immunes at the beginning of the reign of 
Augustus, but to have been reduced to the position of 
attributi of Patrae before the close of it®. Altogether in the 
Roman world there were two hundred or more cities 
which permanently or temporarily bore the title of “‘free 
cities *.”” Of these, Africa and Asia, with approximately 


1 The Lex Antonia is no. 19 in this book. ‘The decree in the case of 
Stratonicea is no. 17. An inscription found in the ruins of Tabae (no. 16) 
is a senatus consultum, apparently conferring the rights of civitates liberae 
on a group of cities; cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 38 ff. 

2 Cf. Tac. Aun. 12.61 and Kuhn, Die stadt. u. biirgerl. Verfassung d. 
rim. Reichs, 2, 20 f. 


3 Cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 1, 395, n. 2. 
SUGPIDILIES. UST. 

Pe Gfa GicuBrati2soriad Ar. Cot 140: 

Of. suet. Laf-2: LG Ea ell re 718: 

® Cf. Henze, op. cit. 34. 2 Gh rienze, Op. cit. 


[ 42 ] 


AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE 


thirty-nine and thirty-five respectively, could boast the 
largest number}. 

The nature of the rights and privileges which a free 
city enjoyed may be best inferred from the /ex Antonia de 
Termessibus. The first privilege mentioned in this docu- 
ment is the right uti suis legibus®. It gave Termessus the 
right to govern under its own laws, to repeal and amend 
them, and to pass new ones, subject only to the limita- 
tion, guod advorsus hanc legem non fiat®, It implied also the 
administration of justice by local courts. Next in order in 
the law is the right to hold land free from the land tax‘. 
This freedom from taxation is set forth more fully in the 
case of certain free cities in Africa®. Inasmuch as the 
people of Termessus are made masters of their own terri- 
tory by this concession, the Roman governor may not 
exercise authority in it, and it is thought of as lying outside 
of his province’, He may not even enter the city in his 
official capacity’. The two rights which have just been 
mentioned are the most fundamental ones, and the auto- 
nomy of the free city was based primarily on them. 

The third right guaranteed in the /ex Antonia is freedom 

1 For the free cities of Asia, cf. Brandis, R.E. 2, 1540-1543. 

2 Cf. no. 19, Col. 1, ll. 8-9. For similar expressions, cf. Livy’s statement 
(38. 39. 12) concerning the Phocaeans: ut legibus antiquis uterentur per- 
missum, and ‘T'rajan’s remark concerning Amisus (Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 92): 


Amisenorum civitas libera et foederata beneficio indulgentiae tuae legibus 
suis utitur. 

3 No. 19, Col. 1, Il. ro—11. 4 Ibid. Col. 1, ll. 12-35. 

5 Cf. lex agraria (= CIL.1, 200), ll. 85 ff. 

6 ‘This is the significance of the account which Suetonius gives (Ju/. 25) 
of Caesar’s arrangements in Gaul: omnem Galliam,...praeter socias ac 
bene meritas civitates, in provinciae formam redegit eique [cccc] in singu- 
los annos stipendii nomine imposuit; cf. Suet. Vesp. 8: Achaiam, Lyciam, 
Rhodum, Byzantium, Samum libertate adempta...in provinciarum for- 
mam redegit. 

7 Cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 1, 378, n. 13 3, 689. When we find Roman 
governors holding court in certain free cities in later times (cf. op. cit. 3, 
689, n. 4) we may surmise that permission had been granted by the cities 
themselves, whose trade would profit by the influx of litigants, witnesses, 
and officials; cf. the case of Apamea in Dio Chrys. 35. 14. 


[agi] 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES 


from the establishment of winter quarters for Roman troops 
in Termessus!. This provision does not prevent Roman 
soldiers from passing through the city or being billeted 
temporarily in it, and by special authorization of the 
Roman senate troops may be quartered in ‘Termessus?. 
In the same paragraph the right of Roman officials to 
requisition supplies in accordance with the limitations of 
the unknown Porcian law is recognized 3, 

The next paragraph in the law seems to reestablish 
certain preexisting rights of the people of Termessus in 
their relations with the Romans‘. The local courts could 
take cognizance even of cases where Roman citizens were 
concerned, but probably in such cases certain restrictions 
were put on the exercise of authority by the local magis- 
trate. 

The last article recognizes the right of Termessus to 
levy inland and maritime customs dues®. This privilege 
was not restricted to civitates liberae. Indeed the one ex- 
tant specimen of a table setting forth port dues or octroi 
is from Palmyra, a city which was not free’. In the matter 
of allowing the imposition of customs dues by local 
authorities the policy of the central government changed 
from one period to another. Under later emperors, like 
Alexander Severus and Julian, Rome was more liberal 


than she had been under Tiberius®. This change in policy 


1 No. 19, Col. 11, ll. 6-13. 2 Tbid. Col. uy, Il. 11-13. 

3 Cf. G. Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani, 269. 

4 No. 19, Col. 11, Il. 18-30. 

> Cf. Mommsen, St. R. 3, 701-706. 

§ No. 19, Col. 1, ll. 31-37. 

7 Cf. Dessau in Hermes, 19 (1884), 486-533. The Palmyra tariff is 
clearly municipal; cf. ibid. 527 ff.; Rostowzew, Geschichte d. Staatspacht, 
405; Hirschfeld, 81, n. 1; cf also commentary on no. 61 and p. I40, 
n. 2. The dues collected at Zarai (cf. CJL. vist, 4508) were probably 
imperial; cf. Cagnat, Les impéts indirects chez les Romains, 116; Rostowzew, 
op. cit. 403. For the case of Koptos in Egypt, cf. Dittenberger, Or. Gr. 674; 
Rom. Mitth. 1897, 75 ff.; Wilcken, Ostraka, 1, 347 ff. 

8 Liebenam, St. Verw. 22 f. 


[ 44 ] 


AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE 


may be due to the general demoralization of civic finance. 
In Termessus the produce belonging to Roman tax far- 
mers was exempt from the payment of duty?. In other 
cases Roman citizens and even Latins were not required 
to pay local portoria. ‘Three considerations probably in- 
fluenced the central government to limit and, in some 
cases, to cancel the local right to levy customs duties: 
(1) the desire to give preferential treatment to Roman 
citizens, and to bring the trade of the world into the hands 
of Rome; (2) the importance of lowering the cost of mer- 
chandise brought to Italy, and (3) the establishment of an 
imperial tariff for revenue®. 

Two privileges which were frequently enjoyed by free 
cities are not mentioned in the /ex Antonia, viz. the right 
of receiving exiles and the right of coinage, although it 
may be noted in passing that the right ofa city in the Orient 
to coin money is not evidence that it was a free city. Up 
to the time of the first Punic war the federated cities re- 
tained their unrestricted right of coinage, although their 
coins were not legal tender in Rome*. However, by the 
close of the republican period, or in the early empire, with 
few exceptions, these cities were allowed to issue small 
coins only, and even the exercise of this privilege was 
subject to the consent and the control of the central 
government®. By these means Roman coins were made 
the medium of circulation throughout the world, trade was 
fostered, and a long step was taken toward making Rome 


1 No. 19, Col. 11, ll. 34-37. 

2 Cf. Livy’s statement (38. 44) of the concession to the people of Am- 
bracia: portoria, quae vellent, terra marique caperent, dum eorum immunes 
Romani ac socii nominis Latini essent. 

3 ‘The way in which the Roman world was divided into tariff districts 
with stations for the collection of imperial customs in each may be seen in 
Cagnat, op. cit. 19-82. By the side of this imperial system non-imperial 
tariff arrangements could not be expected to survive in many cases. 

4 Cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 710. 

> Mommsen, 87. R. 3, 713, n. I, notes ona coin of the free city of Cercina 
in Africa the phrase permissu L. Volusi procos. 


[545%] 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES 


the banking and commercial centre of the world. In- 
cidentally nothing illustrates better than the history of 
local coinage Rome’s policy, as time went on, of restricting 
more and more the traditional rights of the free cities. 

The foreign relations of a free city were determined by 
Rome. Even the federated cities suffered this limitation 
of complete sovereignty. The treaty with them was a 
foedus iniquum. Perhaps the nearest approach to the ex- 
ercise of international rights which they had, lay in the 
privilege of receiving exiles—a privilege of doubtful value 
to them. This right was enjoyed by free cities of both 
classes1. 

While the privileges mentioned above were those com- 
monly granted to free cities, the fact should be borne in 
mind that Rome’s policy changed from period to period, 
that she was more generous to one city than to another, 
and that in the case of some cities “dertas may have been 
little more than an honorary distinction. 

The system of taxation which the Romans followed in 
their provinces was first adopted in Sicily, and it is clearly 
set forth by Cicero in one of his Verrine orations?. In 
this passage he remarks: 


Between Sicily and the other provinces there is this difference 
in the matter of the land tax, that on the others a fixed contribution, 
called a stipendium, is levied, representing the fruits of victory or a 
punishment for engaging in war with us. This plan is followed 
in the Spains and with many districts of the Carthaginians. Or the 
contract system under the censors has been adopted, as it was in 
Asia under the Sempronian law. As for the cities of Sicily we 
accepted jurisdiction over them with the proviso that they should 
retain the same legal status (eodem iure) which they had before, 
and should submit to the Roman people on the terms (eadem con- 


1 ‘There is no evidence that Smyrna, whither Q. Caepio went into exile 
(cf. Cic. pro Balbo, 28), or Patrae, where the exile C. Maenius Gemellus 
stayed (cf. Cic. ad fam. 13. 19. 2), were federated cities. 

2 3. 12-14. 


[ 46 ] 


AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE 


dicione) on which they had submitted to their own rulers. A very 
few of these cities were brought under our rule by our ancestors 
by force of arms, and, although their territory was made ager 
publicus populi Romant, still it has been given back to them. There 
are two federated (foederatae) cities, viz. Messana and Tauro- 
menium}, where it is not our practice to collect tithes. Then there 
are five cities sine foedere immunes ac liberae, Centuripae, Halaesa, 
Segesta, Halicyae, and Panormus. Outside of these, all the land 
of the cities of Sicily is subject to tithes, and was so before the 
Roman people ruled it, in accordance with the wish and under the 
institutions of the Sicilians themselves. 


In this statement Cicero tells us plainly that when the 
Romans acquired Sicily they took over the system of 
taxation which the Syracusans and Carthaginians had em- 
ployed before them, the /ex Hieronica, as he’ calls it else- 
where”. The system may be traced back to Persia through 
the monarchies of the East and the arrangements of 
Alexander’, The territory of Sicily falls into three main 
categories. Certain districts which had made a deter- 
mined resistance were converted into imperial domains‘, 
a few were exempted from taxation, and all the rest of the 
island was subject to the payment of tribute. The tax-free 
cities are of two kinds, as we have already noticed, those 
whose privileges were guaranteed by a treaty, and those 
whose rights were granted in some other way. The third 
class of communities were the civitates stipendiariae. In 
Sicily there were sixty-five civitates®. Now eight of these 
were exempt from taxation, because to the two allied 
cities mentioned here Cicero elsewhere adds a third, 
Netum ®, The land of very few (perpaucae), perhaps of six 


cities, styled civitates censoriae, was declared ager publicus. 


1 In 5. 56a third city, Netum, is added. VM VCIT AD AB 2. 

3 Cf. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 229-240, and the illuminating 
treatment by Frank, Roman Imperialism, 93-99, 108, n. 17. 

Supp Tb yy: © Cf Cie, ge Kerrs2.0133-and 137. 

tat te VEL er 


Lath ed 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES 


Consequently, the rest of the cities, about fifty-one in 
number, were civitates stipendiariae. Exact figures for the 
other provinces are difficult to obtain, but in all of them 
the taxed communities far outnumbered those which were 
free from taxation by the central government. Thus, in 
the time of Pliny the Elder, in Baetica one hundred and 
twenty out of one hundred and seventy-five cities were 
tributary cities, in Tarraconensis, one hundred and thirty- 
five out of one hundred and seventy-nine, in Lusitania, 
thirty-five out of forty-six!. We do not find evidence that 
in all Asia more than thirty or thirty-five cities out of a 
total of about five hundred were free at any time?. 

It was the payment by these communities of taxes ?, in 
Sicily in the form of tithes, which constituted the chief 
mark of difference between them and the free cities. The 
other essential feature in their status which distinguished 
them from the free cities was the fact that each of them 
belonged to the province, and its internal affairs were 
subject to the supervision and control of the governor of 
the province. 

Such rights as these cities had they received in the first 
instance through a /ex provinciae, drawn up usually by the 
general who brought the district into subjection or by a 
senatorial commission*. Their status in certain matters 
was still further defined by the successive edicts of em- 
perors and provincial governors and by occasional decrees 
of the senate concerning a particular city®. Under the 


1 Cf. Schulten, R.Z. 8, 2037-8. 

2 Cf. Brandis, R.E. 2, 1540-3; Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 114— 
121; Kuhn, Die stédt. u. biirgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2, 6. 

3 For a discussion of taxation in the provinces, see pp. 117 ff. 

4 For senatorial commissions in the second and first centuries B.c., cf. 
Willems, Le sévat de la républigue rom. 2, 507, n. 2. 

5 ‘The large number of special measures in existence in the first century 
of our era, conferring certain privileges on provincial cities, is attested by 
Suetonius (Vesp. 8): aerearumque tabularum tria milia quae simul con- 
flagraverant restituenda suscepit...instrumentum imperii pulcherrimum 
ac vetustissimum, quo continebantur...senatus consulta, plebiscita de 
societate et foedere ac privilegio. . . concessis. 


[wABi 


AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE 


republic the power to organize a newly acquired territory 
into a province rested with the senate, and it was necessary 
for this body to draw up the fundamental statutes of the 
province or to ratify the arrangements made by a Roman 
generalt. None of the /eges provinciarum has come down 
to us, but we have frequent references to them in ancient 
literature*, and from these references we can get a con- 
ception of the contents of the constitutions drawn up for 
provincial cities. Thus, under the /ex Rupilia, the citizens 
of a given Sicilian community in dealing with one another 
enjoy the privilege of being subject to their own laws. In 
an action brought by a citizen of one Sicilian town 
against another, the Roman praetor chooses the jurors. In 
an action brought by a Roman against a Sicilian, the judge 
must be a Sicilian; in the reverse situation, the judge is a 
Roman®. The /ex Pompeia, among other matters, fixed 
certain conditions of eligibility to the local magistracies 
and senates in Pontus and Bithynia, and regulates admis- 
sion to local citizenship*. Outside the /eges provinciarum, 
the leader or the commission which organized a province 
often drew up a special charter for a particular city. 
Rupilius, for instance, in 132 B.c. gave Heracleia in Sicily 
a charter, one of whose articles prescribed the method of 
choosing the members of the local senate®, and the 
charters granted to various cities in Bithynia and Pontus, 
perhaps by Pompey, seem to have differed from one 
another in some particulars®. Probably each city was 


1 Cf. Willems, op. cit. 2, 703-717. 

2 For the /ex Rupilia which P. Rupilius drew up for Sicily in 132 B.c., 
after the Slave war, cf. Cic. iz Verr. 2. 323 2. 38-40; 2. 903 2. 1253 3. 40. 
For the /ex Pompeia in Bithynia, cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80, 112, 114, 
Huss) otrabo,21 2253-92 3) Cass. Dio, 37 220m esivyy Lp.it02.0 Fon the ver 
Metel/i in Crete, cf. Livy, Ep. 100, and for the ex Aemilia in Macedonia, 
Livy, 45. 32. For Pompey’s general arrangements in the East, cf. Dru- 
mann-Groebe, Geschichte Roms, 4, 477 ff. 

SnC fCientn err. 12232) 4 Cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 79, 112. 

BRC CiCh ia err ones, 

6 Cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 109: quo iure uti debeant Bithyniae vel 


AMA [ 497] 4 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES 


allowed to preserve in large measure its traditional usages. 
These original grants were reaffirmed, extended, re- 
stricted, or cancelled in subsequent periods by the Roman 
senate, or by the emperor, and defined in the successive 
edicts of provincial governors. ‘I'wo specimens of senatus 
consulta, regulating in some respects the affairs of Teos! 
and Thisbe?, are extant, but these decrees were adopted 
in 193 and 170 B.c. respectively, before ‘Teos and Thisbe 
became parts of a Roman province. 

We may form a general conception of the part which 
the edict of the governor of a province played in building 
up the law of the land by looking at the summary which 
Cicero gives his friend Atticus of his Cilician edict’. This 
edict is an edictum tralaticium, inasmuch as Cicero has 
taken over in large measure the edict of his predecessor‘. 
He has, however, introduced some provisions from the 
‘* Asiatic edict’’ of Q. Mucius Scaevola. In the same way 
the edictum Siciliense for a given year was modelled on 


Ponticae civitates in lis pecuniis quae ex quaque causa rei publicae debe- 
buntur ex lege cuiusque animadvertendum est. 

1, GIG). 3045 = Viereck, op. cit. p..2, NO. 2. 

whl OF Pas atom fps 

3 Cf. Cic. ad Att. 6. 1. 15: De Bibuli edicto nihil novi praeter illam ex- 
ceptionem, de qua tu ad me scripseras, “‘nimis gravi praeiudicio in ordinem 
nostrum.”’ Ego tamen habeo icodvvapotcayr sed tectiorem, ex QO. Mucii P. F. 
edicto Asiatico, “‘extra quam si ita negotium gestum est, ut eo stari non 
oporteat ex fide bona,” multaque sum secutus Scaevolae, in iis illud, in quo 
sibi libertatem censent Graeci datam, ut Graeci inter se disceptent suis 
legibus. Breve autem edictum est propter hanc meam diaipeow quod 
duobus generibus edicendum putavi; quorum unum est provinciale, in quo 
est de rationibus civitatum, de aere alieno, de usura, de syngraphis, in 
eodem omnia de publicanis; alterum, quod sine edicto satis commode 
transigi non potest, de hereditatum possessionibus, de bonis possidendis, 
vendendis, magistris faciendis, quae ex edicto et postulari et fieri solent, 
tertium de reliquo iure dicundo aypadov reliqui. Dixi me de eo genere 
mea decreta ad edicta urbana accommodaturum, itaque curo et satis facio 
adhuc omnibus. Graeci vero exsultant, quod peregrinis iudicibus utuntur. 
Nugatoribus quidem, inquies. Quid refert? [amen se a ‘rovoyiav adep- 
tos putant. Cf. also Cic. ad fam. 3. 8.4; ad Att. 5. 21. I. 

A Csi Gichad Aas, 21. 19 Osis aga fam, 318.145 


[7507] 


AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE 


that of the preceding year+. Cicero tells us that his edict 
was in three sections. The second part dealt with such 
matters as the granting of bonorum possessiones and mis- 
stones in bona, and the third section, which was modelled 
on the edict of the urban praetor, treated de reliquo iure 
dicundo. \t is the first section, the part which Cicero 
characterizes as provinciale, which is of special interest to 
us. This portion of the edict described the policy which 
Cicero would follow and the rules which he would adopt 
in handling the accounts of cities, and in dealing with 
questions involving debt, the taking of usury, transac- 
tions in bonds, and the business of the tax farmers. 
Arrangements were made to relieve many cities of their 
debts”, to force dishonest local magistrates to return their 
ill-gotten gains 3, to keep down the expenses of the Cilician 
cities4, to prevent usurers from exacting more than the 
legal rate of 12 per cent.®, to save the cities from exorbitant 
requisitions ®, and to secure their rights alike to the pro- 
vincials and the tax farmers’. These were some of the 
practical applications of the principles laid down in the 
first section of Cicero’s edict. Governors of provinces, 
even under the empire, retained the ius edicendi which 
Cicero exercised, but after the codification of the provincial 
edict under Hadrian, and its legalization by a decree of the 
senate ®, this right had little practical meaning ®. Under the 
empire changes in the status of cities in imperial provinces 


Che CICHIA Metre 2200352: 3: ahe. pe Cic: ad Att. 6. 2. 4% 
Bite OIC aa iil, O12 8. 4 Cf. Cic. ad fam. 3. 8. 5. 
ee Cie aa AAD OTT I. SOT. Cich ad) Att. 5.10.3. 


Ci Cicad Ait! 6; 2415: 

8 It is still a disputed question whether after the reforms of Salvius 
Julianus there was an edictum perpetuum for each province or a uniform edict 
for all the provinces; cf. Karlowa, 631 f. and Girard, Manuel ¢lém. de droit 
rom. 52 ff. 

® In this connection it is interesting to notice that Anicius Maximus, a 
governor of Bithynia under ‘Trajan, ruled that in certain cities of his pro- 
vince men chosen to the local senates by the censors should pay an initiation 


fee (cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 112). 
as ae 4-2 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES 


at least were made under direct instructions from the 
emperor!, Legally these changes held good only during 
the reign of the emperor who made them, but after the 
middle of the first century of our era it was customary 
for an emperor to ratify the acts of his predecessor?. 

To sum up our conclusions then, the working constitu- 
tion and the laws of the city of Apamea, for instance, in 
the second century of our era would be based on the /ex 
provinciae of Cilicia, as modified by special concessions, 
restrictions, or changes made by the senatorial com- 
mission or the general who organized the province, and as 
subsequently changed by decrees of the senate, by edicts 
or rulings of the governors of Cilicia, or by imperial 
constitutions or mandata. It is impossible, therefore, to 
give a list of the rights enjoyed by provincial cities of a 
certain class which will hold for all the cities of that class. 
This statement is true in particular of the cévitates stipen- 
diariae. ‘Ne can, however, specify the privileges which 
were frequently granted to cities of this sort. The privilege 
most highly prized by the people of these cities was the 
retention of their local codes? and the right of having their 
actions at law decided by their fellow-citizens. They re- 
tained also their local organs of government—magistracies, 


1 See pp. 233.7. For literary specimens of these imperial communi- 
cations, see the two epistles of Domitian and an edict and epistle of Nerva in 
Plin. Ep. ad Trai. 58. In the seventy-ninth letter an edict of Augustus fixing 
the minimum age for incumbency of the local magistracies in Bithynia is 
mentioned by Pliny; in the sixty-fifth letter he speaks of various imperial 
edicts concerning Asia, Sparta, and Achaea. 

aC foouet, 277. 8, 

3 Cf. Cicero’s remark in a letter from Cilicia (ad 4¢t.6. 1. 15): multaque 
sum secutus Scaévolae, in iis illud, in quo sibi libertatem censent Graeci 
datam, ut Graeci inter se disceptent suis legibus, and, in speaking of the 
court which he held at Laodicea, he says (ad Att. 6. 2. 4): omnes (civitates) 
suis legibus et iudiciis usae, avrovouiay adeptae, revixerunt. Cf. also Cic. 
in Verr. 2. 32. Scaevola had been governor of Asia, so that the same prin- 
ciple must have held in that province also. For the method of choosing 
jurors in Sicily when Romans or Sicilians of different towns were involved, 


cf. Pp. 49. 
eee 


AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE 


senates, and popular assemblies—as we can see clearly 
from Pliny’s letters to Trajan, and communities on the 
frontier probably had the privilege of raising an armed 
force in an emergency for self-defence. Cities of this class, 
with the approval of the emperor or governor, also had the 
right to lay taxes on their citizens4, and in some cases to 
issue copper coins, although the minting of other coins 
was in the hands of the central government?. 

The rights of the tributary cities do not at the first 
glance seem to differ materially from those of the free 
cities. Communities of both classes retained their local 
codes, had their own senates, assemblies, and courts, and 
had the right to lay taxes and make contracts. But, as we 
noticed above, the stipendiary cities were subject to the 
payment of tribute and to all the abuses attendant upon it; 
they were liable to the constant interference of the governor 
of the province in their internal affairs, as we can infer from 
the letters of Pliny, and they had to submit to the billeting 
of troops and to the requisitions and exactions of Roman 
officials and soldiers*. The two classes of cities discussed 
in this chapter shared with the municipia the privilege of 
retaining their traditional procedure*+. Only colonies were 
required to adopt Roman law. In other words all provincial 
cities of native origin, except those which were raised to 
the status of a colony, had the common characteristic of 
being governed by their own local codes of laws. The edict 
of Caracalla went far toward raising the stipendiary cities 
to a level with the other cities of the empire. Up to 
A.D. 212 the Romans residing in these cities enjoyed a 
general immunity from local liturgies. Their exemption 

1 See the permission to levy vectiga/ia granted by Augustus to the 
Saborenses and confirmed by Vespasian, no. 61. 

2 Cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 762. 

3 How vexatious were the requisitions of the soldiers and imperial freed- 
men is brought out in the appeals for relief made to the emperor in the third 
century by the Aragueni (no. 141) and the people of Scaptoparene (no. 
139). 

SACHA DRO. 


Cesena 


CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES, eErc. 


made the financial burdens of their less fortunate fellow- 
citizens very heavy. Consequently the granting of Roman 
citizenship to the natives of tribute-paying cities by Cara- 
calla! put all the residents of these cities on an equality, 
and removed the financial disabilities from which the non- 
Roman element had suffered. 

This chapter brings to an end our study of the various 
political units which the Romans used in the administra- 
tion of the empire, and we may stop for a moment to survey 
the growth of the policy which Rome adopted in her rela- 
tions with the rest of the world. As Schulten has well said?, 
the history of Rome illustrates the steady development of 
the imperial idea. At the outset the city of Rome stands 
alone. In time she gains hegemony over the members of 
the Latin League. Through the conquest of Italy comes 
her supremacy over the whole peninsula, with the forced 
concession of liberal rights to Italian communities as a 
result of the Social war. The acquisition of the provinces 
brought her into relations not only with cities, which were 
granted autonomy under treaty rights, but also with sub- 
ject towns and tribes, and finally the theory, not that 
Rome, but that the emperor was master of the world 
developed, and the city of Rome sank to the level of the 
other cities of the empire. 


1 See especially the commentary on no. 192. 


2 Rh. Mus. 50 (1895), 556. 


[ 54 ] 


[Mey] oAeU 
pue ‘drysuezn19 


uney 10 [ ary 
‘diysueznto uewmoy pue 
ueulOY diysuezn1o 
pasty Jo 70.7] uewoy | 
winidrorunyyy e1UO]OD 


ae eS SSS 


snyeg snjndog suas snseg 


praes e lee | 


BIIeIPUSdNg seyAD seqeueD UINTAIseD sNdIA UIN[NQeIIOUOD eINDaJovIg 


| | | | 
| 


SHU.) [e019 T, | sase]]iA puke Satzd 












JUIWIUIAAOS-jJJEg aofduroouy YIU yusMIUIeAOS-jJag ao_duI0D YUMA 


SHU) SAT eIISIUINI PY UeumoOrYy 


CIA Pav aval 


THE MUNICIPALSYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 
AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST 


under their control forms of government which 

differed from oneanother in many particulars. ‘They 
differed in respect to the numbers, titles, and functions 
of the city magistrates, and in the share which the people 
or the aristocracy had in the control of affairs. The chief 
magistrate, for instance, in many of the old Italian cities 
was called praetor}, or dictator”, or interrex*, or consult. 
In Africa he was usually styled sufes®, while in Greek 
lands the commonest titles were apywyv and otparnyds. 
Usually the college of chief magistrates was composed of 
two members, but we occasionally find /// viri and even 
X viri mentioned in the inscriptions®. In the East the 
local senate was, nominally at least, more quickly re- 
sponsive to the popular will than it was in the West, 
because its members in Greek cities were frequently 
chosen by a direct vote of the people and held their 
positions for a year only, whereas in the West senates were 
largely made up of ex-magistrates who served for life. In 
the West a large measure of uniformity was introduced 
into the municipal system before the close of the re- 
publican period. This change was largely due to the fact 
that the cities in the western provinces rarely had long 
political traditions behind them, so that they found no great 


A HE Romans found in the cities which were brought 


E.g. at Anagnia, Auximum, Beneventum. Cf. Dessau, 3, p. 694. 
E.g. at Aricia, Caere, Lanuvium. Cf. op. cit. p. 686. 

E.g. at Formiae and Fundi. Cf. op. cit. p. 690. 

E.g. at Ariminum. Cf. op. cit. p. 684. 

E.g. at ‘Thugga and Avitta Bibba. Cf. op. cit. p. 698. 

Cf. op. cit. pp. 686, 698. 


aw F&O pre 


[iS Ons) 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM IN THE WEST 


difficulty in accepting a ready-made system. In fact in 
this quarter of the world Roman institutions and the Latin 
language made rapid headway, and partly by voluntary 
imitation, partly by legislation, the system which had 
developed in the city of Rome prevailed. In the East, 
however, Greek culture and the Greek language stood in 
the way of the ready adoption of Latin institutions, and 
titles and practices which had existed for generations 
could not be easily changed. But it is true that, while old 
titles and forms were tenaciously held, magisterial func- 
tions and essential governmental methods were brought 
into greater conformity with western practice, and after 
the promulgation of Caracalla’s constitution the tendency 
toward uniformity was very marked. It will be con- 
venient therefore to take up separately the municipal 
systems of the West and the East, while recognizing the 
fact that even in the West! no description in all its details 
will be applicable to every city. 

Municipalities all over the Roman world enjoyed com- 
plete or limited self-government. They chose their own 
magistrates and passed their own ordinances. The govern- 
ing powers in them were the local magistrates, the local 
senate, and the popular assembly. In the West the titles 
and functions of these three organs of government were 
made reasonably uniform toward the end of the republic. 
Whether the natural tendency toward uniformity was 
stimulated by drawing up model municipal charters or not 
is a matter of much doubt?. 

The populus or plebs urbana was made up of citizens 


1 Our principal sources of information concerning the municipal system 
are the inscriptions, and in particular eleven municipal laws and charters, 
of which seven are given in this book (cf. nos. 20, 24, 26, 27, 28, 64 and 
65). The others, which are very fragmentary and add little, if anything, 
to our knowledge of the subject, are Bruns, 31, 32, 33 and 33 ¢. All these 
legal documents come from the West and four of them belong to Caesar’s 
time. 

2 Many scholars have supposed that the lex Iulia municipalis was in- 
tended as a model, but cf. commentary on no. 24. 


Bayicdl 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


(coloni, municipes, cives) and of resident aliens (incolae). 
Both classes were subject to the munera, and both had the 
right to vote, but resident aliens were not allowed to hold 
office until a later period in the empire. Resident aliens 
were also subject to the court processes and to the munera 
of their native city. Local citizenship was gained, as at 
Rome, by birth or adoption, by manumission}, or through 
the gift of the emperor or the local senate. For voting 
purposes citizens were grouped in curiae, tribes, or cen- 
turies. In Malaca resident aliens, who were Roman or 
Latin citizens, were assigned by lot to one of the curiae 
in the popular assembly?, and a similar practice was prob- 
ably followed in other municipalities. We are particularly 
concerned with the relations of the central government to 
the municipalities, and in connection with resident aliens 
there is an exercise of imperial power in the municipalities 
which is of interest to us*. An instance in point is the 
transfer of the citizenship of a certain C. Valerius Avitus 
by Pius from the municipium Augustum to the colonia 
Tarraconensis*. Another interesting case is the adlectio 
by Hadrian of a certain Valerius into the colonia Caesar- 
augustana®. Under the republic the people seem to have 
exercised freely their power to legislate on many matters, 
but under the empire the principal function of the popular 
assembly was the election of magistrates or priests for 
which elaborate provisions are made in chapters 52-60 
of the lex municipalis Malacitana of Domitian’s time. Many 
municipal inscriptions record the fact that a statue has 
been set up in honor of a certain individual postulante 
populo or ex consensu et postulatione popult, but the formal 

AHDI2. 50.1 13 God. J. 10, 401 Fe 

2 Cf. no. 65, chap. 53. This is the custom followed in the case of 
resident Latins at Rome in early days; cf. Livy, 25. 3. 

3 Mommsen, S¢. R. 2, 883 77.3; 1081, nn. 2 and 4. 

Peer, 4277, 

° CIL. 11, 4249; cf. also Schmidt, R.E. 1, 369 and Diz. Ep. 1, 414 ff. 


® Cic. de leg. 3. 16. 36: et avus quidem noster singulari virtute in hoc 
municipio, quoad vixit, restitit M. Gratidio. . .ferenti legem tabellariam. 


Post] 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST 


action in such cases was taken by the local senate, and 
popular approval was probably indicated in some informal 
way. 

The chief magistrates in western municipalities were 
usually styled duoviri iure dicundo. Below them were the 
duoviri aediles. Sometimes these two boards formed a 
single college and the members of it were known as 
quattuorviri ture dicundo and quattuorviri aediles. Usually 
the magistrates in colonies were called duovirs, and in 
municipia, quattuorvirs!. Every fifth year the chief magis- 
trates took the census and then received the title guin- 
quennales. In the absence of the duovirs their place was 
taken by a prefect. The treasury was managed by 
quaestors, usually two in number. 

The conditions of eligibility to the duovirate are laid 
down with great precision in the tabula Heracleensis* and 
in the /ex municipalis Malacitana®, and in the /ex coloniae 
Genetivae Iuliae* it is provided that no one shall be 
eligible to a magistracy who may not be made a decurion. 
In the tabula Heracleensis of Caesar’s time the age require- 
ment is thirty years®, but toward the close of the first 
century of our era it has been reduced to twenty-five at 
least. Perhaps this change was made by Augustus®. A 
candidate must of course be a free-born citizen, solvent, 
never convicted in the courts or brought into disrepute 
by following an ignoble trade, and he must follow the 
cursus honorum through the quaestorship and aedileship. 
Nomination and election proceeded as at Rome. The /ex 
municipalis Malacitana, however, has a significant pro- 
vision’ to the effect that, if an insufficient number of 
candidates offer themselves, the official who is to preside 
may make the necessary nominations, but the men thus 


1 Liebenam in R.E. 5, 1804. 

2 No. 24, ll. 89 ff. 3 No. 65, chap. 54. 
4 No. 26, chap. 101; cf. also no. 24, ll. 135 7. 5 No. 65, chap. 54. 
6 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 79. 2. 

7 No. 65, chap. 51. 


[ 59 ] 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


nominated by him may propose the names of other people 
in place of their own. 

As chief magistrate one of the duovirs presided at 
meetings of the popular assembly and senate, and carried 
out measures passed by either of these bodies. A good 
illustration of his functions in such matters is furnished 
by the famous inscription of 105 B.c. from Puteolit. He 
had general charge, not only of public works and buildings, 
but also of public funds. He managed public festivals 
and games, and every five years took the census. Reference 
seems Clearly to be made to the criminal and civil juris- 
diction of the municipal magistrate in the tabula Herac- 
Jeensis*, in the lex [ulia agraria®, and in the lex de Gallia 
Cisalpina*, while in the ex col. Gen. Iul.° we read: ne quis 
in hac colonia ius dicito neve cuius in ea colonia iuris 
dictio esto nisi [I viri aut quem II vir praefectum reliquerit 
aut aedilis uti hac lege oportebit, neve quis pro eo imperio 
potestateve facito, quo quis in ea colonia ius dicat, nisi 
quem ex hac lege dicere oportebit. The criminal juris-~ 
diction which the duovir exercised in Italy under the 
republic was transferred under the early empire to the 
praetorian prefect and the city prefect. In the provinces 
the governor absorbed the judicial powers of the local 
magistrate. This encroachment of the imperial govern- 
ment on the functions of the municipal magistrate came 
about gradually, and it is important for our purpose to 
trace briefly the development of the process. To the office 
of praefectus praetorio, as established by Augustus, only 
military functions were assigned®. The appointment of 
Sejanus to the post and the long absence of ‘Tiberius from 
Rome gave it a political significance. Later Burrus, as one 
of the chief councillors of Nero, held the position, and 


1 CIL. 1, 577 = x, 1781 = Dessau, 5317 = Wilmanns, 697. Cf. also 
Wiegand, Fahr. f. class. Phil. suppl. 20 (1894), 661 ff. 


ile tp od bp gy Grate 3 Bruns, 15, chap. 3. 
“INow27, chap..20, 11.7515; 23, 314 Chaps thd 
5 No. 26, chap. 94. § Herzog, 2, 20377: 


[ 60 ] 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST 


under Commodus the praetorian prefect Perennis became 
practically prime minister!. From this time on the civil 
functions of the office predominated, and that its judicial 
importance increased is clearly proved by the appointment 
to it of such eminent jurists as Papinian, Paulus, and 
Ulpian?. Like the office of praetorian prefect that of city 
prefect gained greatly in importance during the absence 
of Tiberius from Rome. It was the duty of the praefectus 
urbi to maintain order, and naturally the power was given 
him to try and to inflict punishment on those guilty of 
crimes. In this way his court soon crowded out the 
guaestiones in Rome and put an end to the criminal juris- 
diction of municipal magistrates in villages up to one 
hundred miles from Rome. Criminal jurisdiction in the 
rest of Italy beyond that point was under the control of 
the praetorian prefect®, while in the provinces it was 
administered by the governor. By this transfer of power 
municipal magistrates lost an important part of their 
functions, and their dignity was correspondingly lessened. 
In the middle of the first century B.c., in civil actions 
the duovirs or quattuorvirs were competent to hear cases 
involving as much as ten thousand or fifteen thousand 
sesterces*, and in certain cases they had jurisdiction irre- 
spective of the amount involved. In Latin municipia they 
could also legalize manumission, emancipation from the 
patria potestas and adoption®, and could impose penalties 
for the violation of local ordinances®. ‘These various 


1 Hist. Aug. Com. 5. 
2 Hist. Aug. Pesc. Nig. 7; Alex. Sev. 26. Cf. also ibid. Ant. Phil. 11; 
net Sev. 4. 

3 See the passage quoted by Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 969, n. 2 from Ulpi- 
anus, Jib. 9 de officio proconsults (written under Caracalla; Co//. Mos. Rom. 
Leg. 14. 3. 2): iam eo perventum est constitutionibus, ut Romae quidem 
praefectus urbis solus super ea re cognoscat, si intra miliarium centesimum 
sit in via commissa. Enimvero si ultra centesimum, praefectorum praetorio 
erit cognitio, in provincia (vero) praesidum provinciarum. 

4 Cf. commentary on nos. 27 and 28. 
5 Liebenam, R.F. 5, 1834. eOpecti ihe lath 


[ 61 | 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


powers were much curtailed in the later period as we shall 
have occasion to notice in another connection}. 

The same principle of collegiality held good for the 
duovirs as was observed by the consuls in Rome. In 
Salpensa and Malaca each could veto the action of the 
other within certain limits?. In matters where only one 
duovir could officiate, preference was given to the older 
one in Malaca®. Municipal aediles were colleagues of the 
duovirs, just as praetors at Rome were colleagues of the 
consuls, but like the praetors they were col//legae minores, 
and could not oppose the action of the duovirs. 

In many cities a magistrate on taking office was re- 
quired to pay an initiation fee’, and during his term to 
contribute to the public games®, and he was expected to 
give large sums for the improvement of his native city, 
or for the entertainment of his fellow-townsmen. While in 
office he was served by attendants, had a special seat in the 
theatre, and enjoyed certain other marks of distinction®. 

It is interesting to notice that the emperor was not 
infrequently chosen duovir, and provision was made for 
this purpose in the charter of Salpensa’. ‘The usage in this 
matter becomes more sharply defined as we advance into 
the empire. Three early instances of an honorary duovirate 
occur in the case of T. Statilius Taurus®, a prominent 
political leader under Augustus®, and M. Barbatius!®, 
another supporter of Augustus, and T1. Statilius Severus!. 


1 See pp. 200 f. 2 No. 64, chap. 27; no. 65, chap. 58. 
PY No. 65,:chap.152. 4 Liebenam, St. Verw. 54 ff. 
5 No. 26, chap. 70. § Liebenam, R.Z. 5, 1815/f,. 


? No. 64, chap. 24. 

8 See the inscription from Dyrrhachium (CJL, 111, 605) praefectus quing. 
T. Statili Tauri. 

9 Prosop. 3, 263, no. 615. Taurus held the consulship for the first time 
in 37 B.c. and was consul again in 26 B.c. Inthe year 16 B.c. (cf. Tac. Ana. 
6. 11) he was very advanced in age, so that he must have been honorary 
duovir at Dyrrbachium early in the reign of Augustus. 

10 Mommsen, 8%. R. 2, 828, n. 5. He was quaestor in 41 B.c.; cf. Klebs, 
Jed BS Sale 

RENT LLAX, ROLOs 


[ 62 ] 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST 


These are the only known cases in which the honor was 
granted to anyone not connected with the imperial family}. 
Under Augustus, and for a time under Tiberius, it might 
be conferred on any member of the imperial family?, but 
from the closing years of Tiberius’ reign no other repre- 
sentative of the ruling house than the emperor or his 
destined successor could hold it?. When a private citizen 
or a prince held the office he had a colleague, but appa- 
rently from the last years of Tiberius’ reign it was pro- 
vided that the emperor should have no colleague in the 
offiice*, When an honorary duovir was appointed, the 
actual duties of the office were performed by a prefect?. 
In other words an imperial appointee became chief magis- 
trate in a city in such a case. The number of imperial 
prefects of whom we have a record is not large enough to 
make this official an important factor in bringing the cities 
under the control of the central government, but the im- 
portance of the office lies in the fact that we have here the 
earliest instance of the appointment of an imperial official 
to take charge of the affairs of a city. The praefectus im- 
peratoris is the progenitor of the curator rei publicae who 
played so important a rdéle in robbing local magistrates of 
their authority® and in bringing local affairs under the 
control of Rome. It may, in fact, be significant that the 
imperial prefect disappears at about the time when the 
curatorship was established’. 

The functions of the municipal aedile were identical 
with those of his counterpart in Rome, and, therefore, 


1 Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, who was honorary duovir in Pisidian 
Antioch (cf. CIL. 111, §. 6809), was the father of Nero. 

2 Cf. ¢.g. CIL. 11, 1534, 8. 5617; 111, 8. 6843; v, 7567; x, gor, 902, 
904, 6101. 

3 Mommsen, Stadtrechte von Salpensa u. Malaca, 415. 

PeOP Nett AzT. 

5 'This procedure involved the exercise within well defined limits of an 
autocratic power granted to Caesar in the /ex co/. Gen. Iu/. no. 26, chap. 125. 

© Cf. pp. 90 f- 

7 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 1806 f.; Hist. dug. Had. 19. 


Races 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


need not be described here. In fact it is reasonably 
certain that the office did not develop independently in 
the various Italian cities, but that it was directly introduced 
into their municipal systems by Romet. In a very small 
number of Italian cities, where there had been in early 
times a praefectus iure dicundo, on the removal of this 
official, the aedile became the chief magistrate and even 
held the census?. 7 

Most municipalities had quaestors whose powers were 
similar to those of the quaestor in Rome. Where the office 
of quaestor was lacking, its duties were taken over by a 
third aedile chosen for the purpose or by one of the 
duovirs?. 

In connection with the magistrates we should also 
notice the local priests, the pontiffs, augurs, sacerdotes, 
and, under the empire, the flamens*. Provision is made 
in the /ex col. Gen. Iul.° for the election of certain of these 
priests in the local comitia. Of these priests the flamens 
who were attached to the cult of the emperor and of the 
imperial house are of the most interest to us, because they 
played an important part in developing loyalty to the 
emperor and in giving unity to the empire; through the 
imperial cult which they fostered, the conci/ia of the pro- 
vinces developed, which exerted considerable influence in 
bringing the cities, the provinces, and the imperial govern- 
ment into closer relations®. 

In the cities of Italy the municipal senate was often 
called sezatus’, but 1t was repugnant to Roman sentiment 
to allow Roman official titles to be used by magistrates or 


1 Kubitschek, R.Z. 1, 459. 

2 Kubitschek, op. ciz. 1, 461. 

3 Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 167. 

4 For the various priestly offices, cf. Dessau, 3, 568-584. 

5 No. 26, chap. 66. 

6 For a list of imperial flamens in the municipalities, see Dessau, 3, 
571-574: 

? Kibler, R.E. 4, 2319 f. Constant use has been made of Kiibler’s 
excellent article in the rest of this chapter. 


[poa i) 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST 


organizations outside Rome, and in new colonies senators 
were commonly called decuriones and the body to which 
they belonged, ordo decurionum. In all the different classes 
of cities or villages described in chapters 1 and 11, except 
the vict, castella, and canabae, there was a local senate. 
Usually this body had one hundred members. This is the 
case, for instance, at Canusium!, Cures, and Veii?. Smaller 
numbers are occasionally found, however*. The rolls of 
the ordo were prepared at intervals of five years by the 
guinguennales from the list of ex-magistrates, with such 
additions as were needed to make up the normal number. 
In some Greek cities, however, we find the method of 
popular election or of cooptation followed*. Under the 
republic venal or autocratic governors interfered with the 
free choice of local senators®. Under the empire governors 
acted within the law, but, if we may draw an inference 
from Pliny’s experience in Bithynia®, questions of eligi- 
bility and conditions of admission to local senates were 
settled by the governor. Occasionally the emperor directly 
nominated a senator’. [he senatorial lists from Canusium® 
and Thamugadi® show us the composition of senates in 
the third and fourth centuries respectively. In the senate 
of Canusium there were sixty-eight ex-magistrates and 
thirty-two members who had held no office. In addition 
to this list of one hundred active members there stand in 
the album the names of thirty-nine patroni, who were 
honorary members, and of twenty-five praetextati, or sons 
of senators, who of course did not have the right to speak or 
vote. Inasmuch as most senators were ex-magistrates, 


1 Cf. commentary on no. 136. 2 Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 845, n. I. 

3 Cf. commentary on no. ISI. 4 Kiibler, op. cit. 4, 2324 f. 

5 Cic. in Verr. 2. 120: quorum ex testimoniis cognoscere potuistis tota 
Sicilia per triennium neminem ulla in civitate senatorem factum esse gratis, 
neminem, ut leges eorum sunt, suffragiis, neminem nisi istius imperio aut 
litteris. 

6 Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80, 112, 113. 

OLE 3129 r=. Dessau, -034:3. 

8 No. 136. ® CIL. vit, 2403 = Dessau, 6122. 


AMA [ 65 | 5 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


conditions of eligibility for a magistracy were applicable 
to membership in the ordol. In almost every municipality 
free birth was a prerequisite to membership, but in certain 
ultramarine colonies, like Urso, Corinth, and Carthage, 
to which Caesar probably took out many freedmen, the 
requirement of free birth was relaxed for a time*. Although 
local citizenship was a condition of eligibility, we occasion- 
ally find a resident alien admitted to the senate®, and in 
other cases citizens of one community were also granted 
the right of citizenship in another municipality, and in 
this way could hold office in both places*. The minimum 
age requirement in the early period for a magistracy, and 
consequently for the senate, was thirty years®. Later it 
was reduced to twenty-five years®, and an edict of Augustus 
perhaps set it at twenty-two’, but Trajan interpreted the 
edict as requiring a minimum of thirty years from those 
who had not held a magistracy. The property qualification 
was usually one hundred thousand sesterces®. The initia- 
tion fee varied in amount from one city to another®. In 
Rusicade it reached the exceptional sum of twenty thou- 
sand sesterces!®, Decurions wore a characteristic dress, 
had special seats at the plays and games, were exempt 
from certain forms of punishment, and could appeal to the 
emperor when under a capital charge". 


* Cf. pp. 59f. 

2 Hardy, Three Spanish Charters, 49, n. 116. 

3 Dessau, 6916: ex incolatu decurio; cf. also 6992. 

* Dessau, 6624: C. Alfius C. f. Lem. Ruf. II vir quinq. col. Iul. Hispelli 
et IT vir quing. in municipio suo Casini; 7005: omnibus honoribus in 
colonia Equestr. et in col. Viennensium functus. ‘The case of a certain M. 
Valerius is interesting (cf. Dessau, 6933). He was a citizen of the res 
publica Damanitanorum, adlectus in coloniam Caesaraugustanam ex bene- 
i divi Hadriani, and then is spoken of as omnib. honorib. in utraq. re p. 
unct. 

5 No. 24, ll. 89 f. 6 No. 65, chap. 54. 

7 Cf. supra, p. 59, n. 6. 

8 Plin. Epp. 1. 19. 2; Petronius, 44. 

® Kibler, R.Z. 4, 2329. 10 CIEL. viii, 7983. 

11 Kibler, R.Z. 4, 2331-2. 


[ 66 ] 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST 


The procedure in a local senate was modelled on that 
of the Roman senate. Indeed many probable conclusions 
concerning the method of transacting business in the 
Roman senate may be drawn from a study of the municipal 
charters and from pertinent inscriptions. Not only do the 
articles found in the charters providing for the presence 
of a fixed number of senators when certain matters are 
being settled remind one of the practices of the Roman 
senate, but they also indicate the items of business which 
were considered of the most importance. Two-thirds of 
the members of the ordo of the colonia Genetiva Iulia must 
be present to authorize the building of new aqueducts}, 
or the choosing of festival days?, and under the J/ex 
municipalis Malacitana the same number must be present 
to audit accounts%, or to settle the question of bondsmen?. 
Fifty members constituted a quorum in the colonia 
Genetiva lulia in authorizing the sending of embassies®, 
the demolition of buildings®, in legislating concerning 
public funds, public buildings, public squares’, and roads§, 
in assigning places for the people at the public games?, 
and in choosing patrons?®, except that, if a Roman senator 
or the son of a Roman senator were proposed as patron, 
the presence of three-fourths of the decurions was re- 
quired!!, Favorable action could be taken in the colonia 
Genetiva Iulia to grant citizens the right to use waste 
water from the reservoirs, if forty senators were present!®, 
and an act could be passed empowering the duovirs to 
pay the contractors who had provided sacrifices, if twenty 


1 No. 26, chap. 99. 2 Ibid. chap. 64. 
3 No. 65, chap. 67. 4 Ibid. chap. 64. 
5 No. 26, chap. 92. 

8 [bid. chap. 75; cf. also no. 65, chap. 62. 

? No. 26, chap. 96. 8 Ibid. chap. 98. 

9 Ibid. chapp. 125, 126. 10 Jbid. chap. 97. 


11 Jbid. chap. 130. In Malaca a quorum of two-thirds of the members 
was required when patrons were chosen; cf. no. 65, chap. 61. 
12 No. 26, chap. 100, and commentary on no. 33. 


[ 67 ] 5-2 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM IN THE WEST 


members were present!. The calling out of the militia, 
which did not permit of delay, could be authorized with- 
out the presence of any specified number?. These items 
of business illustrate the wide range of powers which the 
decurions enjoyed. It is clear that, in the first century, 
they, and not the magistrates, were the directing power 
in the municipality. It is rather surprising that Caesar, 
in founding the colonia Genetiva Iulia after his hard 
struggle with the Roman senate, did not magnify the 
power of the magistrates or the popular assembly at the 
expense of the ordo, but he adopted the pure Roman 
tradition for the three branches of the government. The 
municipal assembly, as we have already noticed, exercised 
practically no legislative powers. In view of the fact that 
the senate’s power predominated in the municipality, it 
is not strange that in the later period, when the central 
government found it difficult to collect taxes, it should 
put the responsibility for them on the decurions. We shall 
see later that the curator rei publicae exercised at times the 
power of annulling decreta decurionum. 

The encroachment of the imperial power on the 
legislative rights of municipal senates is noticeable as 
early as the beginning of the second century. Pliny writes? 
to ask Trajan what shall be done about the aqueduct at 
Nicomedeia, the theatre at Nicaea, and whether he shall 
audit the accounts of Apamea. In Byzantium he cuts off 
the appropriation for a legate. All of these matters, as 
we have noticed, were within the jurisdiction of the local 
senate. These are indications of an overshadowing of the 
local senate by the imperial government and of a decline 
in its importance, but, in the main, membership in it seems 
to have been prized up to the close of the second century 
of our era. 


1 No. 26, chap. 69. 2 [bid. chap. 103. 2 Gfipp. 143 fe 


[ 68 ] 


CHAPTER VII 


THE MUNICIPALSYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 
AND EARLY) EMPERE JIN) THE RASTS 


HEN the Romans first entered Greece, the era 

\ \ of the independent city-state had already passed. 

Some of these had come, directly or indirectly, 
under the control of the Macedonian monarchy. Others 
had already joined a federation wherein they preserved 
their autonomy in local affairs, while the control of their 
armies and the conduct of their foreign relations were 
under the direction of a federal council. Membership in 
the Achaean League seems to have been voluntary, if we 
except the case of Sparta. On the other hand, the Aetolian 
League seems to have brought some of its members into 
the federation by force, and in such cases the local govern- 
ment must have been controlled by a pro-league party, 
or by force of arms. The development of these great 
Leagues was an important factor in restraining the Mace- 
donian kings from exercising despotic sway over the Greek 
cities under their hegemony. While many states retained 
their traditional forms, the local government was con- 
trolled by a system of tyrannies, or by royal agents who 
effectively checked any expression of the ancient political 
freedom. 

When the freedom of the Greek cities had been pro- 
claimed by Flamininus, the Roman senate became in- 
volved as arbiter in all the disputes which broke out as 

1 'This subject is treated in the following works: Kuhn, Die stadt. u. 
biirgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2. 144 ff.; Marquardt, St. Verw. 1. 
316 7.3 Mommsen, The Provinces of the Roman Empire, 1. 252 ff.; Levy, 
La vie municipale de l Asie Mineure, Rev. d. ét. grec. 8 (1895), 203 ff, 12 
(1899), 255 7, 14 (1901), 350.3 Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie; 
Ramsay, The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia; Reid, The Municipalities of 
the Roman Empire; Jouguet, La vie municipale dans l’ Egypte romaine. 


[ 69 ] 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


soon as the Roman forces were withdrawn. The commis- 
sions sent out to settle the local quarrels of the various 
cities usually threw their influence on the side of oligarchy ; 
and, since the Roman senate preferred to treat with the 
aristocratic party represented by the magistrates and local 
senate rather than with the fickle popular assembly, the 
democratic institutions steadily declined in political im- 
portance}, 

When the kingdom of Perseus was finally overthrown 
by the Romans, Paullus established four republics on the 
ruins of the Macedonian Empire. It is unfortunate that 
we have no evidence as to the form of government estab- 
lished in the individual cities, or their relation to the 
federal administration. We may safely assume, however, 
that the municipalities were controlled by an oligarchy 
friendly to Rome. When Macedonia was finally organized 
as a Roman province, the republics were abolished, but 
traces of their existence may be discerned in later times®. 

After the destruction of Corinth Mummius modelled 
the constitutions of Peloponnesian cities on oligarchical 
lines, and revolutionary tendencies on the part of demo- 
cratic factions were rigorously checked®. In other parts 
of Greece the aristocratic party, emboldened by the 
support of Rome, usurped the powers of the popular 
assemblies. This movement was fostered, directly or in- 
directly, by Roman magistrates and commissioners. 

In Greece the Romans had found the country wholly 
organized in civic communities, but in Asia conditions 
were very different. Here the Persians, in their advance 
to the shores of the Mediterranean, had found tribal 
organizations, villages grouped in principalities or king- 
doms, temple-states of various oriental cults, and Greek 
commonwealths in various stages of development between 


1 Colin, Rome et la Gréce, 652. 
2 Frank, Class. Phil. 9 (1914), 49 ff. 


3 Pausanias, 7. 16. 93 no. 9. 


[ go:% 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST 


tyranny and democracy. The conquerors made no attempt 
to found new cities. Those already established they 
governed through a system of tyrants, which was ended by 
Alexander. His biographers claim for him the credit of 
restoring democracy, but it may be doubted whether he 
was more liberal in Asia than he had been in Greece. The 
system of Persian satrapies was continued by the appoint- 
ment of governors in the various provinces. The cities 
were given a measure of independence in local affairs, and 
their administration was vested in the hands of the Greeks, 
who thus constituted a ruling oligarchy. Some features 
of the oriental bureaucracy must have been retained for 
the administration of the royal estates. Very little is known 
of the constitutions granted to the cities founded by 
Alexander. Apparently Alexandria had a senate and a 
popular assembly, at least for a time!. The Diadochi posed 
as patrons of Hellenism, and this attitude found ex- 
pression in the foundation of new cities. The extension of 
this policy was made possible by the great influx of Greek 
soldiers, merchants, and farmers who settled in every part 
of Asia. Cities sprang up along the great trade-routes, 
around military stations, and at other strategic centers. 
Above all, the city served as a useful unit in governing the 
country and in securing its loyalty. Many of the towns 
became very wealthy and powerful, and in time of war, 
or when the royal exchequer was low, they were able to 
secure concessions which gave them greater liberty in 
self-government. 

When the Romans extended their sway over Asia Minor, 
they adopted the same policy which they had pursued in 
Sicily. A few cities were allied to Rome; others were 
given their freedom with the right to use their own laws 
and institutions, and these cities probably enjoyed im- 
munity from tribute; the majority, however, became civi- 
tates stipendiariae, and paid tithes to Rome. The honorary 


1 Plaumann, K/io, 13 (1913), 485 ff. 
La] 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


title of colonia, with or without the zus [talicum, was con- 
ferred by Caesar and later emperors on cities already 
established. After the age of Augustus new colonies were 
seldom founded in the eastern provinces}, 

The Roman senate appointed a commission to draw up 
a lex provinciae and to organize each province as it was 
admitted, although some commanders, as Pompey and 
Sulla, formulated laws for the provincials without the aid 
of a senatorial committee. The acts of military comman- 
ders, however, had to be ratified by the senate. We cannot 
tell how far the commissions interfered with the problems 
of local administration, but it is evident that no attempt 
was made to secure uniformity in municipal government?. 
The /ex Cornelia regulated the amount which might be 
spent on embassies, and required the cities to elect their 
magistrates fifty days before the end of the year®. The /ex 
Pompeta determined the age at which a candidate should 
stand for office, and provided that ex-magistrates should 
be enrolled as members of the local senate. The law also 
specified the reasons for which the censor might remove 
a senator from his seat*. These laws could be modified 
by edicts of the emperor or of the provincial governor, 
and some of the provisions were disregarded by the muni- 
cipalities themselves®. Gabinius is said to have revised 
the constitutional forms of Syrian cities in favor of olig- 
archy, and it is probable that this was the general 
tendency of Roman governors’, 

The Romans followed the Greek policy by founding 
new cities. Pompey alone is said to have founded thirty- 
nine’, Since he was a representative of the equestrian 
order, we may suppose that his purpose was to simplify 


1 RE. 5.0. colonia; cf. pp. 3 ff. 

2 Marquardt is of the opinion that laws were devised for each autono- 
mous city, op. cit. 1. 65, 78. ® No. 34. 

4 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80, 112, 113, 114, IIS. 

5 Ibid. 55, 65, 72, 79, 84, 108, 109, ITI, I12. 

§ Josephus, Aut. Iud. 14. 5. 4. 7 Plutarch, Pompeius, 45. 


Fad 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST 


the collection of taxes. The creation of a municipal organi- 
zation, whose members would be responsible for the 
payment of the tribute from their district, not only made 
it easier to collect taxes, but also gave the pub/icani greater 
opportunity for making loans and greater’ security for 
their repayment. It is not necessary to dwell upon the 
terrible exploitation of the Asiatic cities by tax-gatherers 
and Roman officials, as well as by the leaders of the 
various factions, who supported their armies by forced 
levies during the civil wars!. There is no evidence that 
the economic pressure resulted in any constitutional 
changes in the municipalities, but we may suppose that 
those interested in the collection of tribute would favor 
the election of the wealthier members of the community 
to office, while the constant arrears in the annual quota 
would give the governor unlimited opportunities to inter- 
fere in the problems of local administration. This state 
of affairs may explain the statement of Strabo that the 
ancient institutions of Cretan cities had fallen into 
abeyance, because the towns of Crete, as well as those of 
other provinces, were governed by the edicts of Roman 
rulers?. 

In their long experience in provincial government the 
Romans had found that the city, with its dependent serri- 
torium, was the unit through which the province could be 
best administered and the taxes most easily collected. 
For this reason the emperors devoted their attention to the 
spread of the municipal organization in every province. 
As the client kingdoms were incorporated in the empire, 
their territory was divided among cities or added to im- 
perial estates. The tribal units of Galatia and the pre- 
fectureships of Cappadocia were replaced by towns’. 
The territoria granted to many of the new foundations 
were often necessarily of vast extent. The larger village- 
communities, therefore, had an opportunity to develop 


1 Chapot, op. cit. 18 ff. 2 Strabo, ro. 4. 22. 
3 Kuhn, op. cit. 2. 231; Perrot, de Galatia provincia Romana, 83. 


Lv7erl 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


along independent lines, and many of them ultimately 
attained the rank of cities. By the beginning of the fourth 
century of the Christian era municipal institutions had 
spread throughout the Orient as the chief instrument of 
imperial administration. 

It would be impossible to outline, even in brief, the 
manifold forms of government found in the Greek cities. 
The ancient states had developed along individual lines, 
and all of them cherished their traditional customs with 
peculiar reverence. The Romans also had great respect 
for Jonga consuetudo, and since it was their policy to accept 
existing institutions as they found them, they contented 
themselves with modifying the powers exercised by the 
different branches of local administration. The /ex 
Pompeia, which was followed in the cities of Pontus and 
Bithynia, determined the qualifications of senators and 
magistrates and the method of their appointment, but, 
apparently, abolished none of the traditional offices. For 
this reason a great variety of titles survived until late in 
the empire in the older towns, and especially in the free 
cities. Unfortunately we know nothing of the charters 
granted to eastern cities, if we except the fragmentary 
letter of an unknown emperor to the citizens of ‘Tymanda. 
While the constitution given to new foundations may have 
varied according to local conditions, yet precedent was 
powerful in Roman law and custom, and it is equally 
possible that imperial charters followed some model, such 
as the lex Iulia municipalis. Special commissioners (cor- 
rectores) were sometimes sent out to regulate the affairs 
of provincial cities, but we do not know whether they made 
any attempt to revise the constitutions of the towns under 
their jurisdiction. The emperors in their travels occasion- 
ally devoted their attention to municipal problems, but 
the nature of their reforms cannot be determined!. Caesar 
is said to have made some changes in the administration 


1 Hist. Aug. Hadr. 19, 21; Herodian, 4. 8. 3; Tarsus was given laws by 
Augustus, Dio Chrys. 34. 8. 


Logg] 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST 


of Athens}, and in later times Hadrian attempted to revive 
the laws of Solon for the Athenians?; but, for the most part, 
it is probable that the emperors contented themselves 
with financial and legal problems, and that in return for 
such benefits as were conferred the Greeks called them 
the benefactors and founders of their cities. 

The popular assembly declined steadily as a political 
influence in the Greek cities under Roman rule. In the 
republican period the ecclesia in a few cities retained a 
certain amount of initiative and took some share in the 
work of local administration. Under the empire the evi- 
dence shows that the popular assembly was called together 
largely for the purpose of ratifying honorary decrees and 
such proposals as the magistrates chose to present to the 
people. The right of debate or amendment does not seem 
to have been exercised at any of these meetings*. Ina few 
cities, however, exceptions may be found. The Athenian 
assembly retained some power as late as the third century”. 
At Tarsus Dio rebuked the citizens because the council 
of elders, the senate, and the people each strove for its 
own interest, and failed to cooperate for the common 
good®, The same orator also urged the citizens of Prusa, 
who had recently recovered the right to meet in assembly 
(exx\no.dlewv), to exercise their powers with discretion 
so that they might not again lose their privileges?. In 
some of the eastern cities we find a distinction drawn 
between members of the ecclesia (€xx\novaorat), citizens, 
and other residents of the community’. This does not 
necessarily imply that there was an active popular assembly 


1 Swoboda, Gr. Volksbeschl. 192. 2 Cf. no. go, commentary. 

3 'The title xréorys is frequently applied in Greek inscriptions to the 
emperor, governor, and even to private citizens. Cf. Anderson, Fours. 
Hell. Studies, 17 (1897), 402; B.C.H. 17 (1893), 2473; Ditt. Or. Gr. 471. 

4 Swoboda, op. cit. 176 ff.; but cf. R.Z. 5.0. éxxAnaia, p. 2199. 

5 Swoboda, op. cit. 190 ff. § Dio Chrys. 34. 16. 

? Ibid. 48. 1 ff. 

8 Lanckoronski, St@dte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens, 58 ff.; Liebenam, 
St. Verw. 216 ff.; no. 122. 


ysl 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


in such cities, while it is true that, if the membership 
was limited in some way, the ecclesia naturally gained 
greater prestige and had a longer lease of life in the affairs 
of government. The edict of Caracalla, however, swept 
away the distinctions between the various classes in the 
community, and after the beginning of the third century 
the assembly disappeared as a legislative body. 

By the /ex Pompeia the membership of the senate in 
Bithynian towns seems to have been limited to a pre- 
scribed number. The senators held office for life; magis- 
trates were admitted to the order on the completion of 
their term of office; the revision of the rolls was entrusted 
to a censor; honorary members could be appointed with 
the consent of the emperor and on the payment of a fee; 
it was illegal to enroll citizens from other cities in the 
provincel, These provisions show that Pompey took the 
Roman senate as his model in framing the law, and 
senates of this type are sometimes called “‘western’”’ in 
contrast to those of the Greek cities which retained their 
former regulations. As a matter of fact, however, we 
know practically nothing of the method of appointing 
senators in eastern cities under Roman rule?. Censors 
are found in cities outside the province of Bithynia, but 
we do not know whether they had any duties in con- 
nection with the enrolment of senators. It is probable 
that selection by lot had been abandoned in the republican 
period, since 1t was necessary that men of wealth should 
be enrolled. Hadrian wrote to the magistrates and senate 
of Ephesus, requesting that his friend Erastus be admitted 
to the senate. He agreed to pay the summa honoraria 
required from new members if the official scrutiny of the 
candidate proved satisfactory. It would seem as if ap- 
pointments were made at the time when the senate (?) 
was called together to elect the magistrates for the coming 
year. Distinguished actors and athletes were often re- 

1 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80, 114, 115. 
2 Chapot, op. cit. 195 ff. 3 No. 85. 


Lge) A 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST 


warded by being admitted as honorary senators. In the 
golden age of Greek democracy a senator held office for 
a year only, but with the development of oligarchy, it is 
probable that longer terms became the rule. Life-mem- 
bership may have been introduced soon after, if not before, 
the cities came under Roman rule. In the later empire 
membership in the senate became hereditary. 

In a number of cities we find other organizations acting 
with the senate and assembly, especially in adopting 
honorary decrees. At Athens the council of the Areo- 
pagus was revived and attained great influence. In the 
Asiatic cities the gerusia, the véou, the conventus of Roman 
citizens, the trade-guilds, and even villages united with 
the city to do honor to benefactors. The nature of the 
gerusiae is disputed. Their functions were not always 
political, and in some cities they appear to have been 
purely social or religious organizations!. The Roman 
citizens resident in Greek cities usually united in’a guild 
and held themselves aloof from local affairs?. They were 
probably exempt from magistracies and liturgies and 
rarely held such offices. They were usually free from the 
jurisdiction of the local courts. Their privileged position, 
however, was destroyed by Caracalla, who gave Roman 
citizenship to the provincials. The guilds of the various 
trades were not encouraged by the earlier emperors. 
Trajan had forbidden all associations of this kind fearing 
that they might become centres of political agitation and 
disaffection’, In the second and third centuries, however, 
these organizations were widely established. 

An extraordinary variety of titles may be found in the 
magistracies of the Greek cities, and no uniformity was 
attained or desired by the imperial government*. Many 


1 Chapot, op. cit. 216 ff. 2 bid. 186 ff. Ath. Mitth. 16, 144 ff. 

3 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 34, 96. 

4 Owing to the difficulty of distinguishing between magistracies and 
liturgies we have not attempted to classify the different offices in the Greek 


cities; cf. indices to JG.; Cagnat, JGRR.; Liebenam, op. cit. 539_f7. 
7A 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


of the offices, however, were modified under Roman rule. 
For example, the strategus became an important official 
although he had long since lost all trace of military power, 
and with the increasing importance of the senate the 
secretaryship of this body rose into prominence. In many 
eastern cities a board of magistrates (kowdv Tov apyovTwr) 
is found!, This usually consisted of the generals (who are 
sometimes identified with the archons), the archons, and 
the secretary. ‘These annual officials were dominated by 
the senate, and their powers were limited by the supervision 
of the provincial governors and of imperial agents, 
especially the curator ret publicae and the defensor. We have 
traced elsewhere the decline of the local magistracies 
under the pressure of the imperial bureaucracy. In the 
late empire the curator ret publicae was replaced by the 
matnp THs modews?. In the fourth and fifth centuries 
the office of defensor (exdixos) attained great importance 
in municipal government. By this time the traditional 
magistracies had either disappeared or had become mere 
liturgies. 

Election by lot or by popular vote had probably ceased 
soon after the Roman occupation, if not before®. For the 
most part officials seem to have been elected by the senate’. 
There is no evidence that the cursus honorum, required in 
the West, was followed in the East, and the law, enunci- 
ated by Paulus, that decurions only should be elected to 
public office, does not seem to have been applied to Greek 


1 Levy, Rev. d. ét. grec. 12 (1899), 264, 268 ff. 

2 Declareuil, Quelgues problémes ad’ histoire des institutions municipales au 
temps de 1’ Empire romain, 269 ff. 

3 For a late example of the lot, cf. Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 259. For a priest- 
hood, cf. Ditt. Or. Gr. 494. 

4 Cod. Th. 12. 5. 1 (326). Election to office seems to have been regu- 
lated by the provincial edict and the /ex provinciae; cf. no. 34; Cicero, ad 
Att. 6.1.15; Pliny, Epp. ed Trai. 79. For the dpyatpeoia of the senate, cf. 
no. 117; of the ecclesia, cf. Fourn. Hell. Studies, 15 (1895), 118; 17 
(1897), 411; B.C.H. 12 (1888), 17; Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 649. 


fe 78e ] 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST 


cities. Women were not infrequently named for office. 
In such cases it is unlikely that they exercised the duties 
of the magistracy, but were content with making a 
generous contribution towards the expenses attached to 
the position. The summa honoraria was usually exacted 
from magistrates on entering upon the duties of their 
office”. 

In the cities of the Orient the system of liturgies was 
one of their most characteristic features, and here it was 
developed to its fullest extent as a regular part of the civic 
administration. In his discussion of magistracies and 
liturgies Aristotle observed the varying practice of 
different cities, and regarded the distinction between the 
two kinds of public service as largely an academic matter?. 
This is especially true in the case of the more important 
liturgies, such as the priesthoods, the choregia, and the 
gymnasiarchy. In many cases the liturgies and the magis- 
tracies cannot be distinguished. Aristotle called the 
humbler duties émipédevar or dvaxoviar. These terms 
do not appear in the inscriptions, but they correspond in 
general to the Latin curae, and are described in the Codes 
and Digest as munera. In one case we find liturgies 
classified as Bovdeutixat and Syporixai*. These terms 
are not defined, and it is possible that the former refer to 
magistracies. Under Roman administration the appoint- 
ment to liturgies was probably made in the local senates?. 
In a few cases liturgies were undertaken voluntarily, and 
sometimes endowments were provided by wealthy citizens 
to meet the expenses of a particular service. The priest- 
hoods, in a few instances, were sold to the highest bidder®. 
As new liturgies were devised from time to time, especially 
in the imperial service, uniform regulations were applied 


Bei 5O, 26.75 COs ET. 2 Chapot, op. cit. 158 ff. 
3 Aristotle, Politics, 6. 12. 2. 2 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 623. 
5 ‘This, at least, was the rule in the third century; cf. Cod. F. 10. 32. 2. 
6 Bischoff, Kauf und Verkauf von Priestertiimern bei den Griechen, Rh. 


Mus. 54 (1899), 9.f-3 cf. Otto, Hermes, 44 (1909), 594 f- 
79a 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


to them throughout the empire. Ultimately the older 
municipal liturgies and the magistracies, which had vir- 
tually become liturgies, came under imperial regulation, 
and all were governed by uniform principles. 

The right of coining gold was forbidden, but in a few 
instances silver coins were struck under imperial super- 
vision. Permission to issue bronze or token-money was 
freely granted in the East. The exchange of the local coins 
for foreign money was a municipal monopoly, and some 
revenue was derived therefrom!. When the local mints 
were abolished by Aurelian, this source of income ceased. 

The relation of the provincial governors to the municipal 
administration cannot be definitely determined. The state- 
ment of Strabo that most provincial cities were governed 
by edict is doubtless exaggerated, but it is evident that the 
governor had the right to interfere in the administration 
of the civitates stipendiariae at any time, and that the 
privileges of free states were not always regarded by un- 
scrupulous officials*. Cicero, who was fairly conscientious 
in his administration of Cilicia, devoted himself to lessen- 
ing the expenses of the municipalities, to correcting the 
license of civic officials, and to the administration of 
justice. He delighted the cities by restoring to them their 
autonomia, which former governors had apparently taken 
away. He incurred the ill-will of Appius by restricting 
the embassies which the provincials sent to Rome with 
decrees in honor of their departing governor. Under the 
republic most questions concerning the internal adminis- 
tration of the province were decided by the governor with- 
out consulting Rome. Under the empire, as is shown by 
the correspondence of Pliny, paternalism had developed. 
While minor problems were referred to the emperor for 
decision, it is evident that the provincial governor still 
retained considerable power. All appeals were submitted 
to him before they were allowed to go to Rome. Not 


1 Nos. 81, 133, 199. 
2 Marquardt, op. cit. 1. 85 f.; Chapot, op. cit. 126 ff. 


[ 80 ] 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST 


infrequently decrees of the municipalities were presented 
for approval or for veto, and it is probable that no city 
could engage in any important outlay of public money 
without securing the approval of the governor!. In the 
third and fourth centuries the duties of the imperial 
legates were probably closely defined in the writings of 
the jurists, but of these only fragments are now extant. 
The civic rivalries, peculiar to Asiatic towns, may have 
served to divert the attention of the provincials from the 
loss of political freedom. The honor of preeminence in 
rank and the privilege of the neocorate were eagerly 
sought?. While the imperial government permitted this 
rivalry, it was costly to the cities, because local pride led 
them to indulge in extravagant expenditures upon public 
buildings, games, and festivals in their efforts to outdo 
their neighbors. When this extravagance was combined 
with an inefficient and corrupt oligarchical government, 
many cities were reduced to serious financial straits. As 
a result the appointment of special commissioners, such 
as the curator and the corrector, to regulate the administra- 
tion of provincial cities became a common practice 1n the 
second century. The influence of these officials in the 
history of the municipalities has been traced elsewhere?. 
Although the Romans found in the East a fully deve- 
loped legal system which had a profound influence in 
modifying their own jurisprudence, yet the use of Roman 
law gradually prevailed. ‘This was due to the influence of 
the provincial edict and of the provincial assizes, at which 
the governor presided and dispensed justice in accordance 
with Roman juristic principles. The extension of Roman 
citizenship, especially by Caracalla, must have increased 
the use of Roman law, but the Greek elements in the 
Syrian Code of the fifth century and in the Egyptian 
papyri of the Byzantine age show that the native law never 


1 Nos. 69, 71, 80, 98, 99, I14. 2 Chapot, op. cit. 136 ff. 
° Cf. pp. 90f': 
AMA eae 6 


THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC 


wholly disappeared}. ‘The supremacy of Roman law may 
be due, in part, to the fact that advancement in the legal 
profession depended upon a knowledge of Roman juris- 
prudence, and for this reason the scientific study of Greek 
law received little attention in the schools. 

The evidence for the administration of law in the 
eastern cities is scanty. A few cities had the right to try 
cases which arose between Romans and civilians, but there 
is no evidence that they retained this privilege beyond the 
age of Augustus?. The courts instituted by the governor 
were held according to a fixed circuit, and were open to 
provincials as well as to Romans. Plutarch rebuked the 
Greeks for abandoning their local courts in favor of those 
held by the praetor’. The governor’s court, however, 
could only take cognizance of a small proportion of the 
cases arising in a large and busy province, and the local 
courts must have retained jurisdiction over minor cases 
until late in the empire. The right of cities to use their 
native law was probably determined by the lex provinciae, 
but the privilege could be withheld or restored by the 
governor, or the senate, or the emperor. For example, 
Cicero restored autonomia to the Cilician cities, and Chios 
was granted the right to use her own laws and courts by 
the senate*. The question as to the administration of law 
in those cities which did not possess autonomy cannot be 
definitely decided®. Probably all cases involving sums 
of money in excess of a certain minimum were referred to 
the governor’s court; regulations of this kind are found in 
western charters. The powers of the local courts were 
weakened by the appointment of the curator rei publicae, 
who exercised judicial authority. The subdivision of the 
provinces under Diocletian and the separation of the civil 


1 Mitteis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht, 313 ff.3 Grundziige (Furistischer 
Teil), I. Introduction. 

2 No. 40. 3 Plutarch, reip. ger. praec. 19. 

®iad itl. Os Te) 153 D0.04.0, 

> Marquardt, op. cit. 1. 78; Chapot, op. cit. 103 ff. 


[ 82 | 


AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST 


and military powers gave the governor greater opportunity 
to supervise the administration of justice. This is indicated 
by the fact that he is usually styled praeses or iudex in the 
juristic literature of the period. His power to appoint 
iudices pedanei to deal with minor offences implies that the 
municipal courts were no longer of any importance}. 

Since we have described the liturgies and magistracies 
of Egyptian cities in another chapter?, we need only out- 
line the development of their municipal system at this 
point. In the Ptolemaic period there were only three 
Greek cities, Alexandria, Naucratis, and Ptolemais, and 
of their organization little is known. The remainder of 
Egypt was divided into administrative districts called 
nomes, the units of which were village-communities. The 
Romans adopted the Ptolemaic system in its main out- 
lines. Hadrian was the first emperor to found a city in 
this part of the empire, and he thus set a precedent for 
future emperors in recognizing the fact that the Egyptians 
were capable of self-government. Early in the third cen- 
tury Septimius Severus gave to the capital of each nome 
a senate whose members not only bore the responsibility 
of administration, but also assumed the liabilities for the 
collection of the tribute. The senate thus created consisted 
of members who held office for life. The magistracies 
differed from those in the western cities in that the in- 
cumbents, apparently, did not have to be chosen from the 
senate. At first the nome was not regarded as the territory 
of the city, but in the course of time the responsibility of 
governing it and collecting the revenues therefrom was 
transferred to the city. By the beginning of the fourth 
century the Egyptian municipalities were brought into 
conformity with the system which prevailed in other parts 
of the empire. 


NOLL PIS AA Pe va > 2 Cf. pp. 99 f7. 


[easel 6-2 


CHA PEE RGN DE 


HONORES AND MUNERA! 


legislative, judicial, and religious powers. When the 

republican form of government was created, these 
functions were transferred to several magistrates whose 
offices were appropriately called honores. As for the citizen, 
the most important duty which he owed to the com- 
munity was the defense of its lands and flocks. This was 
a munus in the true sense of the word, and it is not strange 
that the same term should have been applied to any service 
rendered to the community, when the needs of society 
became more numerous?. 

While the development of Greek and Roman cities 
followed the same general lines, there was great diversity 
in matters of detail, and it would be difficult to discover 
a definition of honores and munera applicable to all periods 
or to all cities of the Roman empire. Callistratus, the 
Roman jurist, defined a municipal magistracyas an admini- 
strative office in the cursus honorum which might or might 
not involve the incumbent in personal expense. The liturgy 
differed only in the fact that it carried with it the right to 
spend money without receiving the distinction of an official 
title*. Callistratus probably lived in the third or early 
fourth century, when it was evident that the distinction 
between magistracy and liturgy rested largely on ancient 
tradition. In fact, many liturgies in Greek cities carried 
the title of apy7 although they were in no sense regarded 
as magistracies. 


] N the regal period of Roman history the king exercised 


1 The best treatment of this subject is found in Kuhn, Die stadt. u. 
birgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 7 ff; cf. Houdoy, Le droit municipal, 

441 ff. 

* The Greek term corresponding to honor is dpyn. Munera is repre- 
sented by Aerroupyia or éruédcra. did DET Ra copy Wee v 


Cshid 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


In Rome the cursus honorum was fixed by law, and 
municipal charters in the West followed the Roman system 
in general outline with minor variations in detail. The 
Greek cities inherited a varied and complicated adminis- 
trative machinery from the past, and the Romans made 
few changes in outward form. The system of popular 
election gave way to a more oligarchic method in Roman 
times, and some of the magistracies were gradually 
modified?!. Even the oriental cities founded by Roman 
generals or governors followed Greek patterns in regard to 
magistracies, except in the case of a few early colonial 
settlements. 

Under the earlier western charters municipal magis- 
trates were chosen by the residents voting in comitia or 
tribes*. If candidates did not present .themselves in 
suficient numbers, nominations were made by the magis- 
trate who presided over the election. Such nominees 
had each the right of nominating another. In later times, 
when public office became undesirable because of the 
heavy expense attached to it, the outgoing magistrate 
nominated his successor, or, if he failed to do so, the pro- 
vincial governor presented a name to the curia which then 
made the election by formal vote®. It is not clear when the 
election was transferred from the people to the curia. In 
the fourth century only a few African towns elected their 
magistrates by popular vote+. As oligarchical tendencies 
developed, plebeians were barred from honors, and at the 
beginning of the third century only decurions were 
eligible for public office®. It is probable that the method 
of popular election was discontinued when this qualifica- 
tion was introduced, or soon thereafter. Apparently some 

1 For example the orparnyds became an important magistrate in some 


Greek cities under Roman rule, although the office no longer carried 
military power. 


2 No. 65, chapp. 51-54. SRDICT AQ: AT, Ze 
God. LA, Tat GX: 


5 Dig. 50. 2. 7. There are a few exceptions, ¢.g. Cod. F. 10. 44. 2 
provides for a citizen holding office without being a decurion. 


[ 85 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


system of rotation was now followed, and nominations 
were made in order of seniority with due regard to the 
financial standing of the members of the curia!. Magis- 
trates entrusted with the administration of public funds 
were required to furnish bondsmen, whom the munici- 
pality held responsible for their candidate. The sureties 
were examined by a third party, who also shared the 
liability of the bondsmen if he approved their securities. 
In magistracies shared by two or more there was always 
joint responsibility, unless the contrary was stipulated in 
the nomination?. When a candidate refused to discharge 
the duties of the office to which he was elected, his bonds- 
men and nominators were liable for his obligations. The 
governor, however, had the power to compel a magistrate. 
to fulfil his duties*. If he sought to escape office by flight, 
his property was surrendered to his successor; and if the 
fugitive was brought back, he was punished by being 
compelled to serve two years instead of one’. Any nominee 
had the right of appeal to the governor. Until a decision 
was rendered, his colleague held office alone. If both 
appealed, an interim appointment was made, but if the 
city suffered any loss, the candidate who appealed without 
just cause was held responsible®. 

The qualifications of candidates varied in different 
localities and in different periods. The Julian law fixed 
the minimum age for magistrates in Italian cities at thirty, 
although concessions were made to those who had served 
a certain term in the army’. Pompey had previously 
established the same minimum in Bithynian cities, but 
his law was modified by Augustus, who permitted can- 
didates to enter the minor offices at twenty-five, and this 


1 This seems to be implied in Dig. 50. 2.73 50. 4. 6, 14. 
GRO OSs COAD hOs 1Pi 50. 1.053 on mrt. BAL so dae Ree 
DT Ont' 


BD Je NRO TTT, 4 Ibid. 50. 4. 9. 
PeGodsul Za 2.11, £0'( 220). CIIgaAO, 1225s 
7 No. 24. 


[ 86 | 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


appears to have become the universal practice in the third 
century4. In a few cases minors were elected to magis- 
tracies, for the proper conduct of which their parents were 
held responsible. No candidate could secure exemption 
on the plea of old age. The amount of property which he 
must possess was undoubtedly determined by local con- 
ditions, since it would be impossible to frame a uniform 
law applicable to every city within the empire. No magis- 
trate received a'salary, and the expenses of his office were 
heavy. When honors were eagerly sought, it was not 
illegal nor unusual for candidates to promise money for 
public works, games, banquets, or other entertainments, 
but it was forbidden to canvass for office by gifts or dinners 
to private individuals?. It was also customary for a magis- 
trate on entering office to contribute a sum of money to 
the municipal treasury. This summa honoraria seems to 
have originated as a freewill offering, but it later became 
obligatory unless waived by special enactment*. During 
his term of office the magistrate was also compelled by 
law to contribute to various forms of municipal welfare®. 
The Julian law specified that no auctioneer, beadle, or 
undertaker should hold office; and all those who were 
barred from membership in the local senate by virtue of 
their profession or because of legal disabilities were for- 
bidden to stand for a magistracy®. Freedmen were 
disqualified except in colonies composed of citizens of 
this class’. Appointments of women to magistracies were 


purely honorary, and seem to have been made chiefly in the 
Rast ®. 


1 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80: Dig. 50. 4. 8; 50. 5. 2. 

SUL OoEn ON Can 2g Te 8. No. 26. 

4 Liebenam, St. Verw. 54 ff.; Cod. Th. 12. 1.169 (409). 5 No. 26. 

6 No. 24. Other reasons for disqualification are added in Dig. 50. 1. 17, 
203 50. 2. 7, 9, 123 50. 4. 6, 7, 12, 16. For professions exempt, cf. Dig. 
ROMA. TS 2 S00 TO. 

7 No. 24. 

8 Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 158 ff.; Paris, Quatenus feminae res 
publicas in Asia minore, Romanis imperantibus, attigerint; Cod. F.10.64.1. 


[asa 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


Ordinarily a magistrate was exempt from holding the 
same office twice. If, however, there was a lack of eligible 
candidates, he could be compelled to serve a second time, 
but not until five years had elapsed. In case of voluntary 
service an interval of a year was prescribed. Between 
magistracies of different rank the legal interval was three 
years!, If a citizen had served as an ambassador of his 
city, he could not be nominated to another office for two 
years, but Diocletian limited the application of this law 
to those who had undertaken an embassy to Rome?. 
Magistrates could not hold office 1n two cities at the same 
time. In the case of such elections the birthplace of the 
candidate determined priority®. 

Magistrates wore the toga praetexta, possessed the 
privilege of the fasces within their own territory, and were 
entitled to special seats in the theatre. In cities possessing 
Latin rights magistrates were granted Roman citizenship 
on completing their term of office. Not more than six 
could receive this gift in one year, but 1n each case, ap- 
parently, their parents, wives, children, and grandchildren 
in the male line were included*. During his term of office 
no liturgies could be imposed upon him, and as ex-magis- 
trate he was free from the imposition of burdens of inferior 
rank®. 

There is a bewildering variety of municipal offices in 
every province, and it is difficult 1n many instances to dis- 
tinguish between honors and liturgies®. The Codes use 
the general title magistratus municitpales for the whole 


AOU SOL 1: 103350. .4..5as Chae joa La2s 

A112. 50. 7:93 Gods fe 10. 41s eel Or O53. 

Brie. 50.1. 17, 4. 

4 No, 64; RE. 5.0. Fus Latii. 

Pu Div, 50. 4.110; Cod. F210. 43) 2! 

6 Chapot, op. cit. 231 ff; Preisigke, Stadtische Beamtenwesen im rimis- 
chen Aegypten, 11; for different titles of municipal magistrates, see indices 
to the corpora of Greek and Latin inscriptions, Dessau, and Cagnat, JGRR. 
5.0. magistratus municipales. Cf. Liebenam, St. Verw. 279 ff.; Prentice, 
Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 43, 113 ff. 


[ 88 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


empire and never specify the offices in detail. In the 
common type of western municipality we find duumvirs, 
aediles, and quaestors ranking in the order named. The 
principle of collegiality was followed in most magistracies, 
but when the emperor was elected to any municipal office, 
he appointed a prefect who, as an imperial agent, divided 
his authority with no one. In case of an interregnum the 
local senate could appoint a prefect who had dictatorial 
power*. In the third century the quaestor and aedile are 
seldom found, and the latter office was regarded as a 
liturgy in many cities®. 

In Egypt the municipal form of government did not 
develop until the third century, and in this period the 
liturgies can be distinguished from magistracies only 
with great difficulty. Municipal offices were divided into 
three classes, and a citizen might hold the different offices 
in each class without observing any rule of seniority?*. 
Appointments to municipal magistracies were apparently 
made in the local senate in conjunction with the pryzanis. 
At the end of the third century we find nominations made 
by outgoing magistrates or by the senate as a body®. 
Peculiar to Egypt is the plan of appointing supervisors for 
the newly elected magistrate, apparently to prevent his 
escape by flight from the burdens of his ofice®. A nominee 
might avoid office by offering to surrender his property 
to his nominators. In such cases the nominee transmitted 
his offer to the prefect, who, if he gave his approval, in- 
structed the szrategus to see that the appellant suffered 
no hurt nor loss of status during the period while his 
property was being administered by the nominators. 


* Cf pp. 62 ff. 

2 Hardy, Three Spanish Charters, p. 88. A magistrate absent from office 
more than a day nominated a prefect in his place. 

BEL i2.PSO0AwsT 8: 

4 Preisigke, op. cit.; Jouguet, /7e munic. 292 ff.; no. 181. 

PENGS2033 

6 No. 203. This is probably a substitute for the cauzio usually required. 


[ 89 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


Apparently the law permitted them to devote not more 
than two-thirds of the revenue to defray the expense of the 
magistracy and the remainder was returned to the owner. 
Even after the prefect had given his consent to the 
surrender of the property, the local senate apparently had 
the privilege of rejecting the offer and compelling the 
nominee to accept officet. In other respects also the pro- 
cedure in Egypt seems to have differed from that in the 
provinces. For example, citizens who were not members 
of the senate were eligible for office much later than was 
customary in the rest of the empire. 

In the eastern provinces magistrates were usually 
appointed by the local senate at a meeting specially devoted 
to that purpose?. Little is known about methods of 
nomination or qualifications, but it is probable that old 
customs survived, for we find many of the ancient magis- 
tracies still existing in the Greek cities until late in the 
Christian era?. There was, however, a tendency towards 
uniformity in all parts of the empire especially after Roman 
citizenship had been extended to all free subjects by Cara- 
calla. No distinction is made between the East and the 
West in the laws recorded in the Digest and Codes, but 
the jurists were not concerned with local peculiarities and 
customs, and it would be unsafe to assume that local 
privileges and customs did not persist. 

The curator rei publicae and the defensor civitatis held 
offices which were not regarded as municipal honores, but 
as curae. heir importance in civic government is such 
that they should be mentioned here. The curator was first 


1 No. 198. For the procedure in a metropolis before the introduction 
of the municipal system, cf. no. 181 and pp. 28 f. 

2 No. 34. 

3 There is no evidence that the Greek cities were subject to the law of 
Antoninus which required that magistracies should be held according to a 
fixed cursus (Dig. 50. 4. 11). The inscriptions from eastern cities record 
honors and liturgies indiscriminately, and the classification of the various 
kinds of public duties varied from city to city (cf. Aristotle, Politics, 4. 


14 ff). 
[ 90 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


appointed in the reign of Trajan as an imperial agent 
whose chief duty was the supervision of the financial 
administration of the municipality to which he was at- 
tachedt. In some cases his jurisdiction extended over 
several towns. At first he was chosen from the senatorial 
or equestrian ranks, although men of humbler position 
sometimes filled the office. In the third century he was 
chosen from the members of the curia by the votes of his 
fellow-senators, and his election was ratified by the em- 
peror. Constantine permitted no one to be a candidate 
until he had performed all his civic liturgies, and he 
cancelled all appointments gained by corrupt practices. 
In the Greek cities the curator was known as hoy.torns and 
in the fourth century his duties were taken over by the 
TaTyp THS Toews. The latter official was elected by the 
bishop, the primates, and the possessores in the reign of 
Justinian. The bishop and five primates had the power to 
depose their candidate if, in their annual survey, they 
found his administration unsatisfactory?. 

Since the curator was an imperial appointment,. the 
principle of collegiality was never applied to the office, 
even when it became in form a municipal magistracy. 
Nothing can be determined about the length of appoint- 
ment except that it was not limited to one year and re- 
appointments were not forbidden®. In some cases the 
office was combined with other imperial duties. While it 
is probable that many cities came under the jurisdiction of 
the curator, the record of the office on stone is com- 
paratively rare, and in very few cities do we find the name 
of more than one, although there must have been a 

1 Liebenam, P2i/o/. 56 (1897), 290f,., gives a full treatment of this office. 
Cf. R.E. 5.0. curator. 

2 Justinian, Novel/ae, 128. 16; Declareuil, Quelgues problemes a’ histoire 
des institutions municipales au temps de l Empire romain, 276 ff. 

3 At Timgad three curatores rei publicae are recorded between 360 and 
367 (CIL. vitt, 2387, 2388, 2403), and their term could not have been 


longer than five years in any case. An inscription published in B.C.H. 17 
(1893), 98, records a term of ten years. 


Lon] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


succession of curatores when once a city had come under 
their control}, 

Since the curator controlled the municipal revenues, 
and had the power to veto municipal legislation, his 
appointment dealt a serious blow to the development of 
the principle of local self-government?. When the em- 
perors transferred the election to the curiae, the power of 
the landed proprietors who constituted the senates was 
greatly increased, as they were able to choose a candidate 
favorable to their own interests. The corrupt administra- 
tion of the curatores led to such abuses that the imperial 
government was led to create a new office to care for the 
interests of the common people. 

The defensor civitatis (€xdixos) is found in Egypt in the 
first half of the fourth century. Apparently the office was 
not established in other parts of the empire before 364 
when it appears in Illyria?. At this time the appointments 
were made by the pretorian prefect and confirmed by the 
emperor. In 387 the nominations were made by the local 
curiae subject to the emperor’s approval*. Under Hono- 
rius the bishop, clergy, honorati, possessores, and curiales 
chose the defensor®. Majorian gave the plebeians a voice 
in the election, and Justinian made the office a municipal 
liturgy imposed for a term of two years in rotation from 
an album of suitable candidates ®, 

While the duties of the defensor were ill-defined at first, 
the office soon acquired great prestige, and overshadowed 
that of the curator and other magistrates. It was ap- 
parently conceived as an imperial patrocinium to offset 
the growth of private patronage, which was undermining 
state and civic authority and imposing serious hardships 

1 de Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. s.v. curator. 

2 Dig. 39. 2. 46; 50. 8. 2, 5, 113 50. 9. 4. His judicial powers were 
limited (Cod. F. 1. 54. 3 (239)). 

3 P. Oxy. gor; Cod. Th. 1. 29. 1 (364). Cf. ibid. 12. 1. 20 (381). 

a°Ceds Dh. 1.29. 0364), 3 (368), 6204587). 

> Cod. F. 1. 55. 8 (409). 

6 Majorian, Novellae, 3. 1; Justinian, Nove//ae, 15. 


[ 92 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


on citizens who had no other means of protecting them- 
selves against the evils of the age. The defensor was 
especially charged with the protection of the lower orders 
against illegal exactions and other abuses. He supervised 
the revision of the tax lists and the collection of taxes from 
the smaller landowners. Municipal property was under 
his jurisdiction and he kept the public records (acta). At 
first he exercised no police or judiciary power except in 
minor cases, but his authority was extended by various 
rescripts until he had jurisdiction in civil cases up to 300 
solidi. These functions brought the defensor into all branches 
of municipal administration and the other magistracies 
declined greatly in importance. In the fifth century he 
appears to have exercised sole power in many cities. Un- 
fortunately the development of the office of defensor 
followed the same lines as that of the curator and instead 
of defending the interests of the common people, he became 
their oppressor}. 

As the magistrates administered civil affairs, so the 
religious life of the community was in the charge of priests 
of the local and imperial cults, and these priesthoods were 
sometimes regarded as liturgies, sometimes as honores*. 
Usually those citizens were elected to priesthoods who 
had already discharged their municipal obligations, and 
they were thus exempt from liturgies of a personal 
character, but their patrimony remained liable to the 
customary charges. While priests were usually chosen by 
election or cooptation, the honor was in some cases 
hereditary, in others it was sold to the highest bidder. 
The term of service was annual, or for a prescribed period, 
or for life®. After Christianity was officially recognized, 
the pagan cults began to fall into disrepute, and their 
priesthoods were finally abolished. 


1 RE. 5.0. defensor. 
2 ‘The codes vary in their classification of priesthoods. Cf. Cod. Th. 12.1. 


75 (371), 77 (372), 103 (383). 
3 Liebenam, St. Verw. 342 ff. 


[ 93 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


In the fourth century the Codes give to the principales 
(primarit, primates, summates), or leading men of the local 
curiae, a position which seems to have been regarded as 
a virtual honor}, As the magistracies weakened or dis- 
appeared, the principales acquired administrative power, 
and they are grouped sometimes with the decurions, 
sometimes with the defensor, in municipal duties. The title 
was conferred in some cases by a vote of the senate, and 
was even granted to minors, although it was usually re- 
served for those who had satisfied all their municipal 
obligations. The zpomodurevopuevor of Egypt are probably 
the eastern equivalent of the principales. The primus curiae 
or the chief member of the senate received special honors 
and privileges, and on the fulfilment-of certain conditions 
was eligible for the imperial rank of comes primi ordinis. 

Next to the municipal magistracies, the liturgies or 
munera were the most important factor in carrying on the 
civic organization. The imposition of a direct tax on the 
commonwealth had never been popular in democratic 
states and the liturgy was resorted to in supplementing 
municipal revenues. The extension and development of 
this method of administration is one of the most important 
features of municipal history in the Roman empire. 

Liturgies (munera publica) were classified as munera 
personalia and munera patrimoniorum. Under the latter 
might be placed those called munera locorum*. ‘The former 
did not require the expenditure of money, while the 
patrimonial liturgies were virtually a form of taxation on 
the estate of the incumbent. Certain liturgies were called 
munera mixta®, ‘The oriental decaprotia is an example of 
this class, for those who undertook the office were re- 
sponsible for the payment of the imperial tribute from 
their municipality. Ifthe full assessment was paid by the 
citizens, the liturgy involved no expense, but if the deca- 
proti had to make up the deficit, the liturgy became a 

1 Declareuil, op. cit. 164 ff. BED Ie. (COCA RO STAD 
SDT Ae Re Bh tp | 


[ 94 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


munus patrimoniorum. Extraordinary liturgies (munera 
extraordinaria) were devised to meet special needs, par- 
ticularly in the imperial service, and ultimately many of 
this class were incorporated in the regular burdens of 
the municipality as munera personalia or patrimoniorum. 
In the Greek cities we sometimes find liturgies described 
as Onpotikat and Bovdevrixai, which may imply that 
members of the senate were not called upon to undertake 
liturgies beneath their station, or those which called for 
the performance of menial labor}. 

The classification of liturgies varied naturally in different 
cities and in different periods. When there was plenty of 
money in the municipal treasury, the expense of most 
liturgies could be met from public funds, but in times of 
economic depression there was a tendency to transfer 
personal liturgies to charges on estates. The provincial 
governor or emperor often made such changes in the 
classification if the municipality refused to act?. In the 
third century the laws governing munera were framed by 
the imperial bureaus, and in the case of liturgies in the 
imperial service the regulations were applied uniformly 
throughout the empire. It 1s probable that municipal 
liturgies of all kinds were ultimately regulated by universal 
laws. 

Personal liturgies are described in the Codes and Digest 
as munera personalia, corporalia, or sordida. \t is probable 
that the last-mentioned liturgies required manual labor, 
since women and decurions were excused therefrom?, The 
charter of Urso provided that not more than five days’ 
labor could be required from any property-holder within 
the bounds of the colony*. A similar law is found in Egypt 
regulating the amount of labor to be given annually by the 
peasant to ditches and dykes®. In the fourth century no 
distinction seems to be drawn between munera personalia 


1 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 623. ANCog sap e LO. 42154. 
PIS LEOOT LZ ih5O, 1.22, ‘379 Sot On An sac3. 
ay NO..20. > Oertel, Die Liturgie, 64 ff. 


[95 04 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


and sordida. In his treatise on liturgies Arcadius Charisius 
included under munera personalia such duties as the care 
of aqueducts, temples, archives, and public buildings, the 
heating of public baths, the purchase of grain and oil, 
the management of civic revenues, the collection of the 
annona, and the convoying of recruits, horses, and other 
beasts of burden for the imperial service. Irenarchs (police 
officials), limenarchs (harbor masters), public advocates, 
local judges, ambassadors, scribes, and other minor 
officials discharged liturgies of this classt. Other duties, 
which, in different cities, had been recognized by custom 
as personal charges, may be added to this list. 

Charges on estates (munera patrimoniorum or pecuntaria) 
included such liturgies as the holding of the gymnasi- 
archy, or of priesthoods, the provision of transport for 
the imperial service, the sheltering of troops, and the per- 
formance of any public duty for which the incumbent 
had to provide funds from his private means?. 

Certain liturgies were classified and apparently held 
according to a fixed cursus. When the series was once com- 
pleted, a citizen could not be compelled to discharge 
further obligations in that series unless there was a lack 
of other candidates?. Laws were also devised determining 
the intervals which should elapse between the different 
liturgies, but in times of stress evasions are known to 
have been frequent?. 

Every resident of the municipality could be required to 
undertake his share of the liturgies unless he was excused 
by law. Aliens were also subject to the liturgies of their 


SBT gal Corey. legs go 

2 ‘These munera were also classified according as the owner of an estate 
was a citizen of the municipality or an alien. In the latter case the munus 
was called an intributio (Dig. 50. 4. 6), and was apparently a direct tax 
levied on the owner (Dig. 50. 4. 18, 25). 

3 Dig. 50. 4. 3,153 Cod. F. 10. 42. 13 10. 43. 3. While the usual term 
was annual, shorter periods are known; cf. Athen. Mitth. 8, 318, for four- 
month terms at ‘['ralles. 


4 Cod. F. 10. 41. 13 Oertel, op. cit. 388 7.3; nos. 180, 194, 203. 
[ 99 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


native city in addition to those of the city in which they 
resided. If, however, they lived outside the town limits, 
they were exempt from regular munera, but their property 
was subjected to a special tax called iztridutiol. It is 
probable that the laws regulating the liturgies of aliens 
were devised to prevent the migration of wealthy citizens 
from communities where such burdens were heavy to 
more favored municipalities such as Roman colonies, or 
federated states which enjoyed special privileges or were 
subject to lighter taxation. Citizenship in such cities 
would be eagerly sought after and the right of conferring 
it must have been closely guarded. In Tyra decrees of 
naturalization were required to be submitted to the 
governor for approval and we may infer that this city 
enjoyed certain privileges which made citizenship in it 
desirable?. In later times the rigid application of the laws 
regarding alien residents made it practically impossible 
for anyone to reside elsewhere than in his place of birth. 
The law, however, might be evaded by adoption. To pre- 
vent this practice an adopted son was required to perform 
the liturgies of his native city as well as of his new home, 
and on being emancipated he ceased to be a citizen of his 
adopted city?. On the other hand, when a woman married 
a citizen of another city, she became a resident of that city, 
and was under no obligation to perform the munera patri- 
montorum to which her estate might be subjected in her 
native place, nor could her dowry be reckoned as part of 
her husband’s property*. In the fourth century this law 
was modified in the case of heiresses of curial estates®. 
When public funds were appropriated for the discharge 


of municipal liturgies, the appointee was required to pro- 


BS Digs cO.%. 29,353.50. 4.03 cf. GOmam tome ti. 

2 No. 130. Cf. Cass. Dio, 54.7, where Augustus is said to have deprived 
the Athenians of the right of granting citizenship because of the abuse of the 
privilege. 

es Paa Oil Sel Os BO DIZ komt Qe 30, Fa. 

5 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 124 (392). 


AMA L 9a) 7 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


vide bondsmen as sureties for the proper fulfilment of his 
duties!. If he died before the end of his term, the obliga- 
tion fell on his heirs?. In cases of mal-administration the 
nominator and bondsmen were liable for the obligations 
of the defaulter®?, Sometimes, especially in the case of im- 
perial liturgies, the whole curia was held responsible*. It 
may be doubted whether the cuvia was responsible as a 
corporate body for all candidates nominated by it in 
regular session, but where a large number of liturgies were 
imposed, it is probable that every member was involved 
either as a candidate, or as nominator, or as surety. In 
those cases where the liturgy was shared by two or more, 
the principle of solidary liability was enforced unless it was 
stipulated otherwise in the appointment®. 

Outside Egypt we find various methods of appoint- 
ment to liturgies. Sometimes the emperor or the provincial 
governor sent nominations to the curia, or made the ap- 
pointment directly®. The curator rei publicae had power 
to act in certain cases’. Usually appointments were made 
by the magistrates and decurions at a regular meeting of 
the curia, at which a quorum of two-thirds of the members 
was required by law®. We may suppose that, when the 
principle of liability had developed to such an extent that 
members of the senate were heavily burdened, they pre- 
ferred to escape the obligations of nomination and surety 
by allowing the appointments to pass into the hands of 
imperial officials. The financial gain, however, was far 
outweighed by the loss of independence which was 
entailed thereby. In the fifth century it is probable that 
the decurions drew up lists of citizens for each liturgy and 


ROP 50.) Osid 1s 0d, 7. LOT Ques Be DigecO, Ont ae 

RCO J Alin30u%, 23.01. 87.13 Godage 2. 6.118, Op Dis. cOnnaay 

muGed. (1 A112. 6..9(4667). 

Pedy) 10. 4300 S11 g6. 2p re CBs 12. CON Sagar, 

6 Julian, Misopogon, 370-371; Dig. 49. 4. I, 33 50. 5. 2, 73 Cod. Th. 
II. 16. 4 (328); Cod. F. 10. 77. 1 (409). 

(iC Ode aT alin 37w is 

BU GOGs 7 10.3 212s 10.72. 0% ies COM mete SCO. 1 ite Uy Owes ae 


[ 98 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


forwarded them to the provincial governor who made the 
appointments. This at least was the method of appointing 
the irenarch according to a law of Honorius!. Extra- 
ordinary liturgies were assigned by the magistrates at first; 
in the fourth century by the principales, and later by the 
governor’. The latter also decided appeals, although they 
were frequently carried to the emperor, and after 313 the 
imperial court decided all such questions®. Those who 
made illegal nominations were compelled to defray the 
expenses of the appeal#. 

The liturgical system in Egypt was governed by special 
laws owing to the peculiar organization of this region®. 
Very little is known of the system which prevailed in the 
three Ptolemaic cities, although it is probable that they 
did not differ from other Greek cities in their forms of 
administration, if they possessed public lands from which 
they derived revenues. In the rest of Egypt the Ptolemies 
forbade private ownership of land, and munera patrimo- 
niorum were consequently impossible. The Romans 
created a land-owning class and replaced the voluntary 
Greek bureaucracy with a liturgical system which was 
gradually extended throughout Egypt to apply to all but 
a few of the highest positions in the administration. The 
precise date of the introduction of the liturgical system 
cannot be determined, but it was already in existence in 
A.D. 91, and in the following century there is abundant 
evidence that liturgies were compulsory and extremely 
burdensome ®, 

The Egyptian liturgies are usually classified as ywpukai 
and voNurixat. Che former probably denote those peculiar 


SeCog py ctOe7 Fate 2 Cod. F. 10. 46.1; Cod. Th. 11. 16. 4 (328). 
ERDiG ALO ATA ICOM G2, 79 COdM heb Ra es TOs 50.492 10s, 50.3 $ 
Cod. Th 12. 1.t (313) 4) Gods Fui10s 32. 2. 


5 Jouguet, op. cit. 227 f7.; Wilcken, Grundziige, 347 ff.; Oecrtel, Die 
Liturgie. 

§ Bell, Fournal of Egyptian Archaeology, 4. (1917), 86 f.; nos. 180, 
181, 187, 189, 194. 


[ 99 ] 7-2 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


to the administration of the nome and the village; the 
latter belong to the municipal administration of the cities 
and the metropolis. It is often difficult to distinguish 
between the imperial and municipal liturgies and the 
variations in the methods of appointment and appeal in 
the villages and in the metropolis at different periods make 
the study of the liturgical system in Egypt particularly 
difficult! 

In the villages the nominations were made by the elders 
or, more commonly, by the secretary. The latter forwarded 
the list of nominees to the strategus, from whose office it 
went to the epistrategus who, if there were sufficient candi- 
dates, chose by lot and made the appointments. In some 
cases the prefect made appointments?. The sureties of 
the nominee were responsible for the proper discharge of 
the liturgy, but in case of their failure the obligation fell 
upon the entire village. After the introduction of the 
municipal system the evidence for the methods of nomi- 
nation in the villages is scanty. In some cases outgoing 
officials named their successors, in others the candidates 
were designated by the comarch who sent the list to the 
strategus for appointment. 

In the metropolis of the nome the scribe drew up the 
list of eligible candidates in consultation with the Council 
of Archons. The list was probably transmitted to the 
epistrategus through the office of the szrategus. After 202 the 
nominations were probably made in the senate. A system 
of tribal rotation was followed, but if the tribal repre- 
sentatives in the senate failed to make sufficient or proper 
nominations, the duty fell upon the senate as a whole?. 
For extraordinary liturgies the prytanis might make ap- 
pointments, but confirmation by the senate was required ®. 


1 Jouguet, op. cit. 98; Oertel, op. cit. In an unpublished papyrus in the 
Princeton collection the distinction is made between BovAcutixal Accroupytau 
and dnuorikai trnpeciat. 

2 Nos. 181, 185, 198, 200; cf. pp. 89 ff. B  Nofi203, 

4 No. 203. © Cf. Wilcken, op. cit. 399 f- 


Li 100; J] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


The senate seems to have had authority to make the final 
appointment for purely local liturgies. In the case of 
imperial or state liturgies the appointments seem to have 
been made from the lists forwarded from the senate to 
the epistrategus, and in some cases to the prefect!. Certain 
liturgies could be transferred by the incumbent to others 
by mutual agreement. In other cases any transfer or 
commutation by a money payment was strictly forbidden?. 

Appeals were directed to the prefect, or, more commonly, 
to the epistrategus. In some cases they were forwarded to 
the strategus, but probably he was only a medium of 
communication with the epéstrategus?. A nominee had 
the right to surrender his property to his nominator if 
the latter was better able to perform the liturgy, and if the 
nominee claimed that his own resources were insufficient. 
Apparently the entire revenue was surrendered for the 
discharge of liturgies, whereas in magistracies only two- 
thirds of the revenue could be taken for the expenses of 
the office’. 

As the liturgies in the empire increased in number and 
severity, the privilege of exemption became especially 
desirable. Antoninus withdrew the right of cities to confer 
immunity (aréeva), except in the case of physicians, 
teachers, and philosophers, and the number of exemptions 
which a city could grant was strictly limited according to 
its rank®, The provincial governors exercised some 
authority in this matter until Constantine transferred all 
questions of exemption to the imperial bureaus ®. The Codes 
contain a vast number of laws on the subject, regulating 
the grants of immunity in minute detail. It would be 

1 Jouguet, op. cit. 410 f7.; nos. 172, 180, 181, 182, 187, 200. | 

2 No. 181; P. Fior. 3-9, 382; BGU. 1073; P. Gen. 73. 

3 P. Fior. 57; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 263; Cod. F. 10. 48. 9. 

4 Nos. 185, 198. . 

5 Dig. 27. 1.6; Cod. F. 10. 47. 1. It should be noted that the rescript 
of Antoninus was addressed to Asia only, but it is probable that it came to be 
applied to other provinces as well. 


$eGoe TAAL 2H 3i( 3 t 3). 
BRE Seo ey 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


impossible, within the limits of this study, to record the 
legislation in its entirety, and we shall attempt to give only 
the main outlines}. 

Individual citizens received the grant of immunity 
from liturgies by imperial decree. In the case of personal 
liturgies the grant was not heritable, while immunity 
from munera patrimoniorum passed to descendants in the 
male line. Any grant was revocable when the safety of 
the state was endangered?. 

Personal liturgies were not imposed on those suffering 
from physical disability, on minors, on those over seventy 
years of age, on women, or on parents of five or more living 
children. 

Owners of estates subject to liturgies could not escape 
their obligations on any claim based on age, sickness, 
number of children, or sex. It was forbidden to commute 
the personal service required in munera patrimoniorum by 
a money payment or by providing a substitute*. The 
latter provision seems to have been disregarded in Egypt 
and the Orient?. 


1 Bks. 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 16 in the Theodosian Code; 10-12 in the 
Justinian Code; 50 in the Digest, passim. 

2 Dig. 50. 6. 13; Cod. F. 10. 48. 13 (385); Cod. Th. 10. 49. 1-3; 
11. 16. 16 (385); Bruns, 41. 

PED ig ,15 06/2): O17 8950.54 03515 Osa Veen nA: (G0G.) Jea1O.04 2.47 1Or 
HO. HO. 25.33 TO..614 I-43 TO. 02.2, 35 Codie. 1.2. L.t710320)010 (3 4cu 
35 (343); 12. 17. I (324). From these laws it may be seen that the age 
limit was reduced from 25 to 16. Oéertel thinks that 14 was the lower limit 
in Egypt (op. cit. 374). Parents often undertook liturgies in the name of a 
son who was a minor, and sometimes minors were nominated without the 
consent of the parent. In the latter case the estate of the parent could not be 
held responsible for any obligations which might be incurred bythe son (Dig. 
50. 2.6). In Rome the father of three children, in Italy the father of four, 
and in the provinces the father of five children was excused from liturgies 
(Justinian, /wst. 1. 25). Special grants were sometimes made personally to 
fathers of large families (Dig. 50. 6. 6; Cod. Tz. 12. 1. 55 (363); Cod. F. 
FO, 52.'1). 

4 Dig. 50. 4. 16. 

5 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 350; P. Fior. 57. In the fourth century 
members of the local senates who had received appointments in the im- 


Be Deo 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


The following classes of citizens were excused from 
liturgies: members of the imperial nobility, officials in the 
state bureaus, soldiers and officers in the army, veterans, 
members of guilds in the imperial service and of certain 
local guilds in the service of the municipality, or engaged 
in trades under imperial charter, teachers, physicians, 
actors, athletes, priests of pagan cults and of the Christian 
church after its recognition by Constantine, tenants on 
imperial estates (provided that their leasehold covered 
twenty-five zugera), Roman citizens resident in non-Roman 
towns previous to the edict of Caracalla4, and citizens of 
Alexandria and Antinoopolis resident in other towns and 
villages in Egypt. As the property of conductores of the 
imperial taxes was pledged to the fiscus as security, they 
were also exempted. Tenants of waste land who brought 
it back into cultivation were released from all extraordinary 
liturgies as also were farmers at seed-time and harvest. 

The clarissimi or members of the imperial nobility were 
the most important class of citizens who enjoyed exemption 


perial body were required to provide substitutes for the discharge of muni- 
cipal liturgies (Cod. TZ. 12.1. 69(369?), 91 (382), 98 (382), 111 (386), 312 
(391) inter alia). 

1 Ulpian says (Dig. 50. 4. 3) that a citizen of Rome ought also to perform 
the liturgies of his domicilium. ‘This is probably later than the Edict of 
Caracalla as the compilers of the Digest would probably not include regula- 
tions prior to that period. ‘There are very few inscriptions which record 
liturgies of Roman citizens in non-Roman towns and these cases may be ex- 
plained as an act of voluntary generosity, or because the liturgy was held 
before the grant of citizenship was conferred. In the dip/omata issued to 
veterans on their discharge, immunity was conferred upon them and their 
children, and in the single decree of the Senate which we possess conferring 
citizenship upon an alien (Bruns, 41), he was granted immunity from taxa- 
tion and all duties, and the gift was transmitted to his heirs, who would also 
be Roman citizens. In Egypt citizens of Alexandria were exempt from 
liturgies outside their native place, and since an Egyptian could not become 
a Roman citizen without being made a citizen of Alexandria first (Pliny, 
Epp. ad Trai. 5, 6), it follows that Romans enjoyed immunity in Egypt. 
The same rule undoubtedly applied in all Roman provinces, and the guilds 
of Roman citizens which are found prior to the Edict of Caracalla were 
probably formed of members of this privileged class. 


[i FOS NT] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


from municipal obligations sincethey controlled most of the 
wealth of the community. Membership in the order was 
hereditary and, while the title was legally secured through 
imperial favor, it was often purchased fraudulently through 
the connivance of palace officials, and in some cases it was 
assumed by powerful citizens without any warrant what- 
soever. Since every accession to the order weakened the 
municipality by depriving it of citizens or estates subject 
to liturgies, the emperors were ultimately compelled to 
restrict grants of this class. In the fourth and fifth cen- 
turies elaborate legislation was devised regulating the 
elevation of decurions or members of the curial order to 
the rank of imperial nobility. In 340 the fulfilment of all 
municipal obligations was required before any senatorial 
honors were conferred!. Two years earlier a decree had 
been issued compelling those who had no legal claim to 
imperial honors to return to the curial order?. Twenty 
years later the situation in the municipalities again be- 
came serious, and all decurions who had obtained the 
rank of imperial senator were compelled to resign this 
title. A few exceptions were made, but even in these cases 
those who held the rank in question were required to 
fulfil the munera patrimoniorum upon their estates within 
the municipality or to resign the property to the curia®. 
The next step in imperial legislation was to attack the 
principle of hereditary succession. Hitherto the senatorial 
rank had been transmitted to a senator’s children with all 
the privileges which it entailed. After 364 the newly 
elected senator (c/arissimus) was required to leave one son 
in the curial order to discharge the obligations of the 
estate towards the municipality*. After 390 senatorial 
appointments no longer carried the hereditary privilege®. 


1 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 29 (340). 2 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 25 (338). 
® Cod. Th. 12. 1. 48 (361), 58 (364), 69 (365), 74 (371), 111 (386), 
118 (387). 


4 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 57 (364), 90 (382). 
5 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 130 (393), 160 (398). 


[ 104 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


This law was later amended, permitting sons born after 
the appointment to inherit their father’s title and privi- 
leges, while in the case of the highest class, the é/ustres, 
all the sons enjoyed the right of hereditary succession}. 
At the same time permission was given senators to pro- 
vide substitutes to discharge municipal liturgies. In 436 
members of the curia elevated to the rank of spectabiles 
were compelled to undertake the municipal liturgies in 
addition to those imposed upon the imperial order, while 
those appointed to the higher rank of. i//ustres were 
ordered to provide substitutes to discharge the munera 
patrimoniorum. The sons of spectabiles and illustres of 
curial origin remained in the order to which they were 
born?. This law must have made it impossible for residents 
in the municipality to hold municipal and imperial honors 
at the same time, but it is probable that members of the 
senatorial order found means of escaping their municipal 
obligations. Accordingly Theodosius closed the senatorial 
order to all curia/es and this method of securing immunity 
from liturgies ceased. 

Exemption from municipal duties was one of the privi- 
leges granted to those who held the title of perfectissimi 
or egregii, if this honor was conferred in recognition of 
public service or after all liturgies had been duly per- 
formed. Constantine ordained that this honor should no 
longer be conferred on citizens who were eligible for 
membership in their local curia‘. 

Those engaged in imperial service abroad (absentes ret 
publicae causa) were exempt from municipal obligations®. 
This class of persons included the retinue of the pro- 
vincial governors, members of the imperial bureaucracy, 

God ata ais5 (307). PaCods TBs 12\ 1.1187, (436). 

3 Theodosius, Nove//ae, 15. 1 (439), 2 (441). Zeno and Justinian gave 
immunity to curiales only after reaching the highest offices in the imperial 
service (Cod. F. 10. 32. 64, 67). 

4 Cod. Th. 12. 1.5 (317)3 6f. ibid. 12. ¥. 15 (327), 26 (338), 42 (354), 
AA FER) s Gods 7020 52.°3. 

SeDigN4. 6.135 F315 50: 5. 4. Cf Codmfetorasn1.s. 


[ 105 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


ambassadors to Rome or neighboring cities, and soldiers 
or officers in the army. Similar privileges were naturally 
extended to members of the palace bureaus who were 
ultimately organized on military lines!. The curiales 
sought to escape from their local obligations by securing 
positions in one or other of the great bureaus, and in the 
fourth century there was a constant succession of enact- 
ments forbidding their employment. The frequent adop- 
tion of such measures shows that the laws were con- 
stantly evaded. Occasionally attempts were made to seek 
out all curiales in these positions and to compel them to 
return to their cities, but evasions were always possible 
and provision was usually made whereby those who had 
served for some time or had attained a certain rank were 
allowed to remain at their posts?. It is, however, probable 
that the members of the bureaucracy did not always secure 
complete exemption from their municipal obligations, 
especially as the higher officials of curial origin were not 
exempt from all munera patrimoniorum?. In a few depart- 
ments the privilege of exemption was hereditary for a time 
in the case of officers of higher rank*. The liberality of 
emperors varied. Sometimes officials enjoyed exemption 
from certain specified liturgies, sometimes from all of 
them, and in times of stress all privileges might be sus- 
pended®. The laws of Zeno and Justinian gave exemption 
from municipal obligations only to those curiales who had 
attained positions of very high rank in the palace®. 

The laws governing the exemption of soldiers and 


1 Cf. bks 6—8 in the Theodosian Code, and bk 12 in the Justinian Code, 
passim. 

? Cod. Th. 12. 1. 26 (338), 31 (341), 36 (343), 44 (358), 78 (372)5 
Hina: 4 (393), © (398)5 6. 35 passim. 

® Cod. Th. 6. 35. 1 (314), 3 (319). 

4 Cod. Th. 12. 3. 14 (326); cf. pp. 205 ff. 

5 Cod. Th. 6. 35. I (314), 3 (319)3 11. 16. 18 (390); 6. 26. 14 (407); 
Cod. F. 12.23.13 12.26. 1-4; 10. 48. 11-123 12. 19. 43 10. 4g. I (408), 
2 (445); 3 (472). 

8 God. J. 10..32.' 04, 67. 


[EG] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


veterans are of interest. While soldiers were excused from 
most municipal obligations, they were liable to certain 
charges upon their estates!. A soldier home on furlough 
was technically liable for any liturgies which might be 
imposed?, When military service became hereditary, sons 
of soldiers, who did not enter the army, were compelled 
to join the curial order’. Veterans were given special 
privileges*. In the second century the Egyptian veteran 
enjoyed immunity from liturgies (on estates?) for five 
years after his discharge®. In other parts of the empire 
no term is ever specified, and it is usually assumed that 
exemption was for life. It may be questioned, however, 
whether the law applying to Egypt did not extend over 
the whole empire. If a veteran entered the curia of his 
own accord, he was liable for all the liturgies of the order 
unless he had especially reserved his privilege of ex- 
emption®. In the third century the veterans were obliged 
to do road-work and to pay certain vectigalia and intribu- 
tiones*. Apparently their privileges were steadily encroached 
upon, since Constantine was compelled to confirm them 
by special laws 8. 

Members of guilds engaged in the imperial service— 
especially in the alimentation of the capital and in supply- 
ing the armies—enjoyed special privileges and were 
exempt from all municipal obligations; in fact, shipowners 
were forbidden to take up the duties of a decurion in their 


A LDig 80, 405183 50. 507; 103.40. Loaiza 

2 Dig. 4. 6. 34-35. 

8 Hist, dug. Alex. Sev. 58; Cod. Th. 7. 22. 1.(319), 4 (326)3 7. 1. 5 
(364); 12. 1. 18 (329), 35 (343), 79 (379)3 Cod. F. 12. 33. 2-4. 

4 BGU. 628. 5 No. 1 


177. 

6 Cod. F. 10. 44. 1; Dig. 49. 18. 2. Loss of privilege through mis- 
conduct: Cod. Th. 7. 20. 7 (353)- 

? The testimony of Arcadius Charisius, Ulpian, and Hermogenianus 
Warles, cf. i2.'40.,18..45)50. 4. 183 .5Ougs D1. 

8 Cod. Th. 7. 20. 2 (320), 3 (320), 6 (342), 9 (362). Apparently the 
first promises of Constantine were made under compulsion, and the veterans 
later found that there was a tendency to ignore them. 


[home] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


native cities!, Membership in this guild was not only 
hereditary, but also obligatory in the fourth century”. The 
estate of a navicularius was bound to the service of his 
order, and if he bequeathed it to anyone not a member 
of the guild, the legatee was required to assume the obliga- 
tions of the estate towards the guild by becoming a 
member®. On the other hand, a member of the curia 
was strictly forbidden to attempt the avoidance of his 
municipal duties by entering the guild of navicularii*. 
There was a large number of other guilds devoted to the 
imperial service, and it is probable that the rules for 
membership in these societies were ultimately brought 
into conformity with those governing the shipowners?. 
Besides the imperial guilds there were local corporations 
in each municipality formed for the special needs of the 
community, whose members were excused from other 
liturgies as a recompense. These guilds were under the 
control of the municipal authorities by whom their duties 
were designated. The earlier emperors discouraged the 
formation of these local societies for political reasons, but 
the ban was later removed®, and numerous records show 
that these organizations were widespread throughout the 
empire. A law of Honorius at the end of the fourth 
century even went so far as to order all citizens to enroll 
themselves either in the curial order or in some guild’. 
Constantine granted exemption from personal liturgies to 
artisans in a large number of professions, and it is prob- 


1 At first the period of immunity was five years (Dig. 50. 4. 5), but later 
immunity was conferred as long as one remained a member of his guild 
(Dig. 50. 5. 35 50. 6. 6). 

* Cod. Th. 13. 5. 2 (315), 3 (319), 11 (365), 14 (369), 19 (390), 20 
(392), 21 (392), 35 (412); Valentinian, Nove//ae, 29. 

od. Th. 13. 5. 19 (390). 4 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 149 (395). 

5 Waltzing, Les corporations professionnelles chez les Romains; R.E. s.v. 
collegium; Dig. 50. 6. 7. 

§ Many of these were organized by Alexander Severus (Hist. Aug. Alex. 
Sev. 33). For legislation in regard to immunity, cf. Dig. 50. 6. 6. 


7 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 179 (415); cf. 7. 21. 3 (396). 
f ireoey) 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


able that they were grouped in guilds at that time!. 
Wealthier members of the guilds were sometimes drafted 
into the curiae, but it is probable that in the fourth century 
membership in these societies was hereditary and could not 
be resigned at will?. 

Physicians, teachers, and professors of philosophy were 
excused from all personal liturgies and from providing 
billets as early as the reign of Vespasian®. Antoninus 
divided the cities of Asia into grades, and limited the 
number in each of these professions which might be 
granted immunity by the municipal authorities according 
to the rank of the city4.. Elementary teachers were ex- 
cluded from these privileges®. Instructors in civil law 
enjoyed immunity in Rome but not in the provinces, a 
law which must have had considerable importance in the 
spread of Roman jurisprudence’. Constantine granted 
physicians and teachers exemption from all charges, and 
this privilege was later extended to their wives and 
children’. Architects and members of allied professions 
were also excused from personal liturgies. Constantine 
sought to revive the architectural profession by con- 
ferring immunity on the parent as well as the student®. 

Priests of local and imperial cults were free from per- 
sonal liturgies, but were not excused from charges im- 
posed upon estates ®. Their children also enjoyed the same 
privileges. In Egypt the number of exemptions granted 

aT Cod. Th. 13: 4. 2 (337); Cod:- J. 10. O0ur, 

2 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 96 (383); Julian, Misopogon, 368. 

3 Dig. 27. 1. 6; 50. 4. 18; 50. 5. 103 cf. ibid. 50. 5. 8, where the law- 
giver ironically remarks that philosophers, since they despise wealth, should 
not be exempt from munera patrimoniorum, or, if they desire exemption, 
they are not true philosophers. 

A Dige27minOs SO: 6283 Cod: Foto sar sa oat a 

REDIFICOL ATT. OFT s 07M ead ep 

* Cod. Th. 13.3.1 (321), 2 (324), 5 (344) 4 (362), 15 (393) 16 (414), 
17 (414). 


8 Cod. Th. 13. 4. 1 (334) 3 (344), 4 (374); cf Dig. 50. 6. 7. 
* Nos:)164, 1783 Dig. .50,.4.:185 Cod. Tk. 12. 1.123 (335)3. 12. 5. 2 


(337)- 
[ 109 ] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


to the priesthood in each district appears to have been 
limited under Roman rule!. A provincial priesthood could 
not be held until all local liturgies were discharged by the 
candidate, but this high office carried with it the honorary 
title of comes and conferred immunity from all other 
charges”. 

Since magistracies were open to members of the Jewish 
faith, it may be assumed that Jews were also required to 
perform municipal liturgies, although those in the Orient 
claimed exemption?. Constantine required the Jews to be 
enrolled as curiales, granting exemption to a few—pre- 
sumably the priests—in each community. By later laws 
those who devoted their time to the synagogue were 
excused from personal and civil obligations*. In 383 and 
again in 398 the immunity of all sects, and particularly of 
the Jews, was revoked®. The emperor Theodosius again 
withdrew all privileges in regard to exemption from 
liturgies which the Jews may have enjoyed at that time 
and forbade them to be appointed to administrative posts 
or to imperial honors ®. 

Christians were not distinguished from Jews at first, 
but when the political significance of the new religion was 
realized the government granted them no favors. While 
their religious beliefs may have prevented Christians from 
participating voluntarily in municipal duties which in- 
volved the performance of pagan ritual, it is evident from 
the proceedings of the Council of [liberris that Christians 
held magistracies and even pagan priesthoods’. Imperial 
legislation dealing with Christians who avoided their civic 
duties began with Constantine who, in 313, granted 


1 Otto, Priester und Tempel, 2. 250; Oertel, op. cit. 392; no. 178. 


BukeGe ee L2012175 (371),077 1 272): 

PiCoas DAT 20:1 s,.158'(398)s 10) 8,\24ka 8); Dig.-50: 2.03, 
piteg.th 2. 1G. 8.2 (320); 3220) mean), 3.(397). 

5 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 99 (383), 158 (398); Cod. F. 1. 9. 5, IO. 

8 Cod. F. 1. 9. 18; Theodosius, Nove//ae, 3; Justinian, Nove/lae, 45. 
* Declareuil, op. cit. 97 ff. 


Fae ced 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


clerict exemption from all municipal charges!. Evidently 
the suffering curiales found in this law an easy way of 
escape from taxation, and shortly afterwards the emperor 
was forced to issue an edict by which members of the 
curiae or wealthy plebeians were forbidden to enter holy 
orders. The frequent re-enactment of this law in later 
times shows that it was persistently violated, and the 
general trend of the legislation of the fourth and fifth 
centuries followed the principle applied to curtales who 
aspired to membership in the imperial nobility. The 
Church as a career or as means of escape from liturgies 
was closed to members of the curial order as far as 
possible. If they sought to enter the priesthood, their 
convictions were put to a severe test by laws requiring 
that their property must be surrendered to the curia in 
whole or in part, and by the provision of substitutes to 
perform their curial liturgies*. Valentinian cancelled all 
exemptions from tribute and from munera patrimoniorum*. 
Majorian ordered all curiales in the lower offices of the 
Church to return to their former station in life, while 
deacons, presbyters, and bishops were compelled to 
fulfil all their liturgies as citizens®. According to a law 
of Justinian, curiales were forbidden to enter the priest- 
hood except in early life, and on condition of surrendering 
a fourth of their estate to the municipality ®. 

Tenants on imperial estates were excused from muni- 
cipal charges unless they owned other property privately. 
Even these tenants were exempted by a law of Con- 
stantine if their lease of crown lands covered twenty-five 
tugera or more’. Since the emperors wished to increase 
the area of land under cultivation, special immunity was 


1 Cod. Th. 16. 2. 1 (313); cf. ibid. 16. 2. 2 (319), 7 (330), 24 (377). 

*G0d., F416. 2.'3.(320). 

3 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 49 (361), 59 (364), 99 (383), 104 (383), 163 (399)5 
16. 2. 19 (370), 21 (371). ay 

4 Valentinian, Nove//ae, 10. 5 Majorian, Novel/ae, 7, 7 (458). 


§ Justinian, Novel/ae, 6,1 (535). 7% Cod. Th. 12. 1. 33 (342). 
Be ot 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


granted to those who brought waste land under tillage, 
and full ownership was given to the occupants?. 

In studying the numerous documents dealing with 
honores and munera we may easily discern certain ten- 
dencies which have an important bearing on the history 
of the municipalities. The magistracies were coveted in 
the earlier period of the empire, when economic con- 
ditions were favorable and civic life was distinguished 
for its splendor. Even then indications are not lacking 
that decay had already set in. The charter of Malaca pro- 
vided for a possible lack of candidates for civic positions, 
and we may infer that some municipalities had already 
been confronted with this difficulty. Doubtless many 
weaker communities had already been impoverished be- 
cause of the loss of citizens through various economic 
changes. In the third century when famine, plague, 
civil war, and social disorders were widespread, the magis- 
tracies became serious burdens on the incumbents, and 
willing candidates ceased to present themselves for office, 
except possibly in a few cities which enjoyed unusual 
economic advantages. The Codes now lay more stress on 
the burdens attached to magistracies than upon the dis- 
tinction which they conferred, and while some traces of 
the former privileges still remained, the honores differed 
but little from liturgies. In Egypt it is difficult to dis- 
tinguish between the classes of public service, and the 
charges attached to certain magistracies were so ruinous 
that they involved not only the annual income of the 
incumbent, but trenched upon his capital resources. The 
laws reveal the fact that citizens designated for office 
often preferred to abandon their property rather than to 
accept a magistracy, and that many sought to escape their 
obligations by flight. While the decay of the traditional 
offices may be ascribed in part to the development of their 
liturgical character, the creation of the imperial curatores 
and defensores contributed greatly in diminishing the 


1 1Ged. Th..45.:3. 1 (319)s6fe pp. 217 f 
[ea 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


powers and prerogatives of the local magistrates. Officials 
designated by the emperor naturally usurped authority 
because of their greater prestige, and it is not surprising 
to find that the ordinary magistracies disappeared in 
many towns to which a curator had been assigned. 

In the development of liturgies the decurionate fell 
into greater disrepute than the magistracies. Membership 
in the curia became hereditary, probably about the begin- 
ning of the third century, and in the fourth we find an 
order of curiales which apparently included all citizens who 
were landowners and eligible for membership in the local 
senate. Their rank was not only hereditary but also com- 
pulsory. The history of imperial legislation concerning 
curiales may be briefly traced. When the collection of 
taxes was transferred from the publicans to the munici- 
pality, the duty was assigned to a committee of ten chosen 
from the senate (decemprimi) or, as in the East, from 
wealthy citizens (dexdmpwrot), who were not necessarily 
members of the order. It is probable that many cities 
farmed their own taxes and the senate as a whole was 
responsible for their payment. When Septimius Severus 
granted a municipal senate to the metropolis of each nome 
in Egypt, he made the members of this body responsible 
for the collection of the taxes from their nome. The 
Egyptian system was soon extended to other munici- 
palities throughout the empire. At least, in the reign of 
Aurelian, the curiales were responsible for the taxes on 
abandoned property, and there is no reason to doubt that 
other deficiencies were made up by them. When they 
attempted to shift this burden to others, the villagers 
were oppressed and the charge was made that every 
curialis was a tyrant. As liturgies and taxes grew in 
severity, as great landed estates arose owned by proprie- 
tors who enjoyed immunity from municipal obligations 
either by virtue of their patents of imperial nobility or by 
their ability to defy the municipal authorities, and as a 
system of patronage developed whereby many of the rural 


AMA ene 8 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


population escaped their share of taxation by placing them- 
selves under the protection of some wealthy and powerful 
landowner, the curia/es themselves had to bear alone the 
increasing burdens placed upon their order. Their un- 
happy lot was further aggravated by the loss of revenues 
from the public lands, which were frequently confiscated 
by the emperors or forcibly occupied by wealthy citizens. 
In order to preserve the municipal institutions from the 
danger of disintegration, since many curiales were aban- 
doning their property rather than facing the burdens 
placed upon them, the emperors devised stringent legis- 
lation to control citizens who were members of the 
order. Not only were severe penalties imposed upon 
those who attempted to evade their obligations, but every 
avenue of escape was closed. The curiales became a guild 
in which membership was hereditary and compulsory. In 
the fourth century the laws regarded the estate as more 
important than the citizen in the imposition of taxes and 
liturgies, and the owner was virtually reduced to the 
position of an imperial serf. 

While the unfortunate position in which the curiales 
found themselves in the later empire was due to a variety 
of causes, the most important factor was the development 
of the liturgical system. When a volume of tribute flowed 
into the treasury at Rome sufficient to relieve her citizens 
of all taxes, an elaborate system of liturgies was un- 
necessary. In western municipalities our records are un- 
fortunately incomplete, and the clauses of the charters 
pertaining to liturgies are lacking, but it is probable that 
sufficient revenue was derived from the public lands in 
each city to defray the ordinary administrative expenses. 
The citizens could be called upon to give their labour to 
an amount not exceeding five days in public service, and 
the magistrates were expected to supplement the revenues 
by contributions towards public amusements or in other 
ways, such as by the summa honoraria. In the Greek cities, 
however, the Romans found a fully developed system of 


aa] 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


liturgies. This they adopted and in the course of time 
they extended it over the empire. An important factor 
in the extension and development of this system as a form 
of imperial taxation was the depreciation of the coinage 
by successive emperors. By reducing the gold and silver 
content in the various issues, embarrassing financial 
difficulties could be avoided, and the consequent rise in 
prices produced an appearance of prosperity, at least 
among the agricultural classes. When the taxes returned to 
the fiscus in the depreciated coinage, there was trouble. It 
was found that the revenues were no longer sufficient to 
meet the increased cost of administration. Since it would 
be extremely unpopular and possibly dangerous to in- 
crease the rate of taxation, the rulers were left with the 
alternative of further depreciation or of extending the 
municipal system of liturgies to cover various forms of the 
imperial service. As a matter of fact both methods were 
resorted to, until the emperors refused to accept their own 
coinage and demanded the taxes paid in kind. In collect- 
ing these and transporting them to the public storehouses, 
an additional burden was placed upon the municipality. 
The liturgies, which we may call imperial, were distributed 
throughout the provincial cities and were regulated by 
laws applied uniformly to the whole empire. In the 
course of time the local liturgies came under similar 
provisions and tended to become universally applied. Of 
the imperial liturgies the most exacting were those in 
connection with the imperial post and the billeting of 
troops or public servants. The severity of these liturgies 
was increased by the venality and extortion practiced by 
the officials, and although the emperors frequently sought 
to correct abuses they were powerless to cope with the 
widespread corruption which permeated the bureaucracy. 
In addition to the imperial liturgies, the local munera 
grew more burdensome. This was due to economic causes. 
The decline in the fertility of the soil, the alienation of 
municipal lands by confiscation or otherwise, and the 


Pars 8-2 


HONORES AND MUNERA 


appropriation of a large part of the municipal revenues 
by Valentinian and his successors were instrumental in 
impoverishing the municipal treasury and causing the 
transfer of many munera personalia to the class of munera 
patrimoniorum. In this way another burden was imposed 
on the citizens already struggling to meet the increasing 
cost of the administration and the defense of the empire. 
For these reasons it was necessary that the right of im- 
munity from liturgies should be carefully restricted. The 
earliest legislation on this question dates from the reign of 
Antoninus, who limited the power of the municipalities 
to confer this privilege. We believe that the edict of Cara- 
calla was actuated by similar motives. By granting citizen- 
ship to all free subjects in the provinces, the privilege of 
immunity which Romans had hitherto enjoyed was taken 
away, and the liturgies were more equitably distributed. 
In the fourth and fifth centuries there is a constant 
succession of laws which steadily narrowed the right of 
persons holding property in the municipalities to avoid 
the charges which such possession entailed. In the age 
of Zeno and Justinian no citizen of curial origin could 
escape his municipal obligations except by appointment 
to the highest positions in the imperial bureaucracy. Un- 
fortunately the general trend of this legislation aggravated 
rather than mitigated the lot of the curiales. In fact the 
study of the laws governing the magistracies, the liturgies, 
and immunities reveals to the modern student the most 


significant phases in the decline of municipal life in the 
Roman Empire. 


Hekate f 


CHAPTER IX 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND REQUISITIONS 
IN THE PROVINCES 


N O adequate conception may be had of the relations 


which the municipalities bore tothe central govern- 

ment, nor of certain important influences which 
affected the welfare of the cities, unless one knows some- 
thing of the imperial taxes which were levied in the 
provinces, of the methods employed in collecting them, and 
of the requisitions made by imperial officials}. 

The principal tax in the provinces was on land, and in 
Sicily, the first district acquired outside of Italy, it took 
the form of tithes. The Romans simply took over the 
system of taxation there which their predecessors had 
followed?. Had they not found taxes already being 
collected there by the central government which they dis- 
possessed, it is not impossible that the municipalities in 
Sicily and elsewhere might have gone untaxed, and might 
have been incorporated into the Roman state as the 
civitates in Italy had been. In that case the organization 
of the Roman empire would have taken an entirely 
different course, and the provincial cities would have had 
a very different history from that which they did have. 
But finding a careful system of taxation worked out in 
Sicily, and finding machinery in operation which would 
pour a large revenue into the treasury, the Romans con- 
tinued the system. In a similar way, on acquiring Mace- 
donia, they took over the method of collecting taxes there 
which their predecessors had followed, as we shall see 
later. Iwo centuries after the conquest of Sicily Cicero 

1 The munera are treated in another chapter. The Roman financial 


system and its administration have been left out of account in this chapter, 
as not pertinent to our purpose. 


2 Cf. pp- 47 ff. 
Paeao 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


thought of the provincial contribution to the treasury as 
‘‘representing the fruits of victory, or as a punishment for 
engaging in war with the Romans.” And this may well 
have been the conception which the Romans held, down 
to the close of the second century B.c. But in the /ex 
agraria of 111 B.c.® the theory is taking shape that the 
Roman state owned all conquered territory outside Italy. 
By the early empire the new theory, which came perhaps 
from Egypt, was generally accepted by Roman lawyers. 
From this time forth the essential part of the tribute paid 
by the provinces is thought of as rent. This rent may be 
paid in the form of a quota, usually a tenth of the produce 
(decuma), or as a fixed contribution (stipendium). Sicily, 
as we have noticed, paid tithes, and it seems probable 
that the next important province to be acquired, Spain, 
made her contribution to the imperial treasury in a similar 
way at the outset*. In course of time the Spanish assess- 
ment was commuted to a fixed money payment?®. The first 
sure instance of the imposition of a stipendium on subduing 
a new territory occurs in the case of Macedonia. Here 
again, as in Sicily, the Romans took over the system of 
taxation which they found in existence in the newly 
conquered region®, By 168 B.c., then, two different 

1 Cf. the quotation from Cic. in Verr. 3. 12-14, given on p. 46. 

Bilis ZOO; 

? Mommisen (8+. R. 3, 731) thinks that this theory was recognized in the 
Sempronian law of 123 B.c. under which Asia was organized, but cf. 
Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, p. 431, col. 2. 

4 Livy (43. 2. 12) speaks of the demand of the Roman magistrate in 
171 B.C.: ne cogeret vicesimas vendere Hispanos nisi quanti ipse vellet. 
From this remark it looks as if the Spaniards originally contributed one- 
twentieth of their grain. For a different explanation of this passage, cf. 
Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 2, 197. See also Rostowzew, R.E. 7, 154. The 
earliest arrangements in Sardinia cannot be made out with certainty; cf. 
Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, p. 432, n. 2. At all events a decuma 
was exacted of the people in the island. BAC PACiCr i Br ef wl 2 

. Frank (Roman Imperialism, 209 f.) makes the interesting suggestion 
that this fixed annual payment was in lieu of a war indemnity. Thus Car- 


thage at the end of the first Punic war was required to pay an indemnity 
of 3200 talents, and at the close of the second, 10,000. Macedonia, how- 


onde | 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


methods of levying tribute in the provinces had been 
adopted. In some provinces one of these systems pre- 
vailed to the exclusion of the other. In others the two 
methods were combined, and in still other cases part of 
a province paid tithes, and the other part a fixed sum of 
money. Thus Sicily and Asia for many years paid tithes 
only, Gaul always paid a stipendium, one part of Africa 
contributed money, another part, a quota of its produce, 
while Sardinia for some time apparently contributed both. 
It was clearly the general policy of Rome to substitute 
a money payment for a payment in kind. This change was 
made probably in Spain and Sardinia, and certainly in 
Asia, Judaea, and Africa. Undoubtedly it lightened the 
burdens of the provincial cities, because a system of tithes 
always bears heavily on the farmer. So far as the rate of 
taxation goes, assuming that it was Io per cent. on the 
average, it was not exorbitant. While the land-tax was the 
commonest and most important tax outside Italy, it was 
not the only impost peculiar to the provinces in the time 
of the republic. In the regions conquered by them the 
Romans found not only a tributum soli but also a tributum 
capitis. The latter tax was levied in Judaea, Africa, Cilicia, 
Asia, and Britain, and in some of these districts at least 
Rome continued to levy it regularly or occasionally!. This 
impost seems to have taken a variety of forms, according 
to the usages and economic conditions of a province. In 
some cases it was a simple poll tax, in others, a license paid 
by pedlars, shopkeepers, and men engaged in other trades, 
and in still others, an income or property tax?. Probably 
the tributum capitis, however, was thought of under the 


ever, after the victory of Paullus was not in a position to pay down an 
adequate amount. The annual payment, therefore, required of her may have 
been thought of as interest upon such a sum. It is more natural to suppose, 
however, that Rome simply continued the Macedonian system of a fixed 
payment of money each year. ‘This conclusion seems to harmonize with the 
fact that the amount which the Romans exacted each year was exactly half 
that required by the kings. 
1 Cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 2. 198 and nn. 2 Op. cit. 200. 


[Rog 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


republic as a tax intended to supplement or fill out the 
contribution required under the sributum soli’. But as the 
policy of substituting payment in money for payment in 
kind developed, it was natural that this tax should become 
more important. The census which Augustus began in 
27 B.c. in the provinces would furnish a sound basis not 
only for a just valuation of property?, but for the imposition 
of a tax on all kinds of property, and the tributum soli took 
into account, not only the acreage and the character of 
land, but also the number of slaves employed and the 
equipment owned, while the tributum capitis was extende 

to cover other kinds of property®. | 

In this connection a word may be said about the 
scriptura, or payment made by those who pastured their 
flocks and herds on state-land. Under the republic the 
right to collect the fees due for pasturage was let out to 
companies, but in imperial times the privilege of using 
public pasture-land was let out to the owners of large 
herds, or the lands were occupied by herds belonging to 
the emperor?. 

We have had occasion to notice in a preceding chapter 
that in the provinces the unit with which Rome dealt was 
rather the community than the individual®. In accordance 
with this principle the tribute was ordinarily paid, not by 
the homo stipendiarius, but by the civitas stipendiaria®. The 


1 Marquardt, op. cit. 203. 

* Humbert, Dict. Dar. s.v. census, p. 1007, col. 1 and Kubitschek, R.E. 
3, 1918 f. 

8 Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 331. The house tax exacted in 
Cilicia (Cic. ad fam. 3. 8. 5) was an old Jewish tax (Josephus, Az. Iud. 
19. 6. 3) and was also levied in Egypt. This tax may explain the law against 
removing or tearing down houses in some municipalities. 

* Cf. Humbert, Dict. Dar. s.v. scriptura; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. Staats- 
pacht, 410 (62). BSG ESD 7 

§ Cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 185, n. 7; Hirschfeld, 74, n. 6. This is 
clearly shown, for instance, by the statement of Apuleius (4po/. ror) that 
the ¢ridutum soli of Pudentilla was paid in for her to the quaestor of the 
village of Oea: Pudentillae nomine pro eo agello tributum dependi; prae- 
_ Sens est quaestor publicus, cui depensum est, Corvinius. 


Lazo 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


provincial municipality therefore was made responsible 
for the payment of a certain amount, and this fact proved 
to be of tremendous significance in the subsequent history 
of Roman municipalities. When a government lays an 
obligation on a corporation, it must look to the officials of 
that corporation to satisfy it. If the obligation is a financial 
one, and if the corporation cannot or will not meet it in 
full, the officials must make up the deficit. This was the 
situation to which a municipality in the provinces was 
brought in the course of time by Rome’s method of im- 
posing a tax upon it and not on the individual subject. 
Just as the Romans had taken over Hiero’s system of 
taxation in Sicily, so they adopted his method of collecting 
taxes. Instead of collecting the tribute by means of 
government officials, they divided Sicilyt, and later the 
other provinces, into districts, and farmed out the privilege 
of gathering the taxes in each district to the highest 
bidder. The difference between the amount bid by a 
redemptor and the sum which he was able to squeeze out 
of the taxpayers represented his profits under the contract, 
and Livy, Cicero’s Verrine orations, and his letters from 
Cilicia set forth clearly the sufferings of the municipalities 
in the republican period under this iniquitous practice. 
Julius Caesar introduced a measure of reform into this 
system in Asia®. Augustus probably took the collection 
of the tribute away from the publicans in the imperial 
provinces*, and by the time of Nero their activities were 
confined to the collection of the vectigatia®. It would be 


D Gh Cicutmi Perr .3. 67,.75, 84, 803,00: 

2 For the organization of the societates publicanorum, the technical terms 
applied to the officials in these organizations, and the method of collecting 
taxes, cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 184 f7, 298 #7; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. 
Staatspacht, 374 ff.; Hirschfeld, 68 f#; Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 
324 f7.; Arnold, Roman Provincial Administration, 201 ff. 

3 Cf. Chapot, op. cit. 328. 

4 Cf. Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, 433, col. 2. 

> Cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 379; Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 1017 f. and 


n. I end. 


one an 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


hard to imagine a more vicious method of collecting taxes 
than that which had grown up in the Roman world during 
the last century of the republic. Hiero’s system in Sicily 
of farming the taxes out to local contractors made the tax- 
farmers amenable in some measure to local public senti- 
ment. But when the Sempronian Law in 123 B.c. provided 
for the letting of the Asiatic tax-contracts to companies 
in Rome, it removed this salutary restraint on the greed of 
the tax-gatherer, and, what was worse, it led to the growth 
of financial organizations in Rome, which were strong 
enough to bend governors to their purpose and influence 
the senate and the courts. It was the irony of fate that this 
vicious system which bore so heavily on the subject 
peoples of Rome should have gained its strength from a 
law fathered by the great democratic leader, Gaius 
Gracchus. The empire not only did away with this method 
of collecting tribute, but it introduced other important 
reforms in provincial taxation. It substituted a money 
payment in most cases for the more harassing payment in 
kind. Provincial governors were kept under a stricter 
and more constant supervision. Their terms were long 
enough to enable them to inform themselves of con- 
ditions in their provinces and to remedy abuses. The 
taking of a careful census furnished a more equitable basis 
for taxation than had existed under the republic, and cities 
had the right of appealing to Rome from unjust decisions 
on matters of taxation. 

_ Up to this point we have been discussing the principal 
imperial tax paid by the provincial civitares. But in 
addition to the tridutum the central government levied 
portoria, the vicesima libertatis, the vicesima hereditatium, 
the centesima rerum venalium, the vicesima quinta venalium 
manciptorum, the capitulum Jenocinii, a tax on gladiatorial 
shows’, and, in the later period, the annona, the collatio 
lustralts, the capitatio plebeia, not to mention certain vecti- 


1 Cfhonomric: 


( Deaen 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


galia of a temporary character}. The first of these imposts 
were laid under the republic. The portoria go back to the 
beginning of the republic?, while Livy refers the vicesima 
iibertatis to the fourth century ®. 

The Romans applied the term portorium to a duty 
levied on merchandise in transit at a frontier, or when 
brought into a harbor or a city, or when transported over 
a bridge or along a road*. The establishment of an imperial 
customs duty was the result of natural development. At 
a very early period the Romans collected a duty on goods 
brought into their city. In the territory which they con- 
quered they found states collecting such a tax on their 
frontiers or at the gates of cities. The victors took over from 
these subject communities the right to the duties, and deve- 
loped in course of time a tariff system for the whole Roman 
world®. In other words they adopted the portorium from 
the conquered cities just as they had taken over the tribute 
from Hiero in Sicily®. Of the tariff districts in the West 
we can clearly make out four, viz. Spain, the Gauls, 
Illyricum, and the four divisions of Africa’. At the 
frontiers of these districts and also within the districts 
themselves, at river crossings or on the main highways, 
posts were established for the collection of customs®. 
The tariff was a flat ad valorem duty, levied for revenue 
only, and varied somewhat from district to district and 
from one period to another. Under the early empire it 
was 24 per cent. in Gaul and Asia, and probably 5 per 


1 Cf. Hirschfeld, 92, nn. 2, 3. A salt tax is recorded in Priene, Jzschr. 
von Priene, 1113; cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 411 ff.; Cod. F. 4. 61. 11. 

2 Cf. Cagnat, Les impots indirects chez les Romains, 6 f. 

SOG he HLASLI7 ALO 

4 Cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 390, n. 115 and Liibker, Reallexikon, 373, 
Collits 

5 Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 17 /f,. 8 Cf. pp. 47 ff. 

? Cf. Hirschfeld, 78; Rostowzew, op. cit. 391. Cagnat (op. cit. 17) gives 
seven districts in the West. Hirschfeld and Rostowzew omit Spain. 

8 For the Gallic region, cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 47-69; cf. also dz. ¢p. 1919, 
no. 10, ll. 65-70. 


fy t2an 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


cent. in Africa and Illyricum!. Shortly after the time of 
Theodosius it seems to have been raised to 124 per cent.? 
All articles intended for sale were subject to this duty, 
and it was exacted of all persons except those officially 
connected with the central government and excepting 
the members of certain privileged classes, like the veterans 
and the zavicularii*. ‘This tax and the method of collecting 
it were open to two serious objections. In the first place 
it interfered grievously with the freedom of trade, and 
enhanced the prices of raw material and manufactured 
wares. The trade of the empire suffered in the same way 
from the multiplicity of tariff districts as did that of 
France in the eighteenth century. It is only necessary to 
glance at a map of the Roman world to appreciate the 
delays and the expense to which a merchant would be 
subject, for instance, in importing wares into Italy from 
the East. The situation was made worse by the extortionate 
practices and the high-handed methods which the pub- 
licans adopted*. Literature is full of complaints of their 
conduct, and certain emperors went so far as to propose 
the abolition of the tax altogether®. But it was such a 
fruitful source of revenue that it lasted into the later 
empire. 

The vicesima libertatis or manumissionum continued into 
the empire, but was probably abolished by Diocletian®. 
We may infer from the large number of freedmen of 
whom we hear in the late republic and the early empire 
that this tax brought a large sum into the treasury’. The 
master would naturally pay it when he rewarded a slave 
by granting him his freedom, the slave, when the en- 
franchisement was bought from the master. It was 

* Cf. Hirschfeld, 79 f. 2 Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 15 ff. 

° Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 119-125. Now and then people of a favored city 
were exempted from the payment of the portorium; cf. ibid. 125. 


4 Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 88 f. BiGF Carnatop ie. 
6 Cf. Hirschfeld, rog. if. Cag ly of. 


’ For an attempt to calculate the amount in an early period, cf. Cagnat, 
op. cit. 173. 


[ 124 | 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


collected by publicans under the republic and the early 
empirel, It is interesting to notice that in some cases this 
tax went into the treasuries of the municipalities”. Augustus 
introduced the centesima rerum venalium, the vicesima 
quinta venalium manctpiorum, and the vicesima heredi- 
tatium. The first-mentioned tax was levied on goods sold 
at auction, and must have been regarded as oppressive, 
because several attempts were made to abolish or reduce 
it, It continued however into the later empire. The 
4 per cent. impost on the sale of slaves involved only an 
increase in the rate of the cextesima when applied to a 
particular kind of property. 

In this chapter we are not making a survey of Roman 
finances nor even of the Roman system of taxation. We 
are only concerned with the bearing of that system on the 
municipalities of the empire. We are interested therefore, 
primarily, in the imperial taxes which the provincials were 
required to pay. Now the inheritance tax was levied on 
citizens only, and, so far as the provinces were directly 
concerned, would affect merely the Roman citizens 
resident in them*. However, after. the publication of 
Caracalla’s edicts of a.p. 212 and 213, this tax was payable 
by all freemen throughout the Roman world, and from 
this time on the burden of it fell as heavily on provincial 
municipalities as in the earlier period it had fallen on 
Italian cities®. The tax was levied on estates above 100,000 
sesterces bequeathed to heirs other than blood-relations®. 
The collection of it was farmed out up to the time of 


Hadrian. Thenceforth it was collected directly by the 


1 Cf. Hirschfeld, 106 f.; Rostowzew, op. cit. 380. 

ar GPO Do aOs te Ov 3 Cf. Hirschfeld, 93. 

4 Cf. Pliny, Panegyricus, 37-39. 

> For certain probable limitations on the extension of Roman citizenship, 
cf. Girard, Textes, 203-204, and the literature there cited. 

6 Outside of the fact that Augustus established it primarily as a source of 
revenue, he may well have thought that its provisions would help check 
race suicide. On this point cf. Hirschfeld, 98, n. 1. 


ee} 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


central government!. In the time of Justinian we hear no 
more of it?, One important point in the incidence of this 
tax in the provinces is not clear to us. Did it apply to land 
owned and bequeathed by Roman citizens? Ifit did, such 
land must have been subject to a double tax, since a tribu- 
tum was also levied upon it. Possibly in the provinces 
only movable property was liable to this impost. The 
history of this tax illustrates at the same time the gradual 
leveling of Italy and the provinces and the influence of an 
economic factor in bringing abouta political change. When 
Augustus proposed an inheritance tax, to fall on Roman 
citizens, Italy had been free from the payment of the 
tributum for many years. The proposed tax, while not a 
tributum, was viewed in the light of a tribute*. It was a 
step toward removing Italy from the favored position 
which she had hitherto held when compared with the 
provinces, and Augustus carried out his purpose against 
the strong opposition of the senate only by threatening 
to impose the tribute on Italy. The extension of Roman 
citizenship by Caracalla to all freemen in the provinces 
is the last important step in the process of equalizing the 
political rights of provincials and Italians. The result of 
his action was to bring the provincials under the operation 
of the inheritance law®. Consequently the history of this 
tax, from Augustus to Caracalla, is synchronous with the 
process of reducing Italy to the political and social level 
of the provinces, and is intimately connected with it. The 

1 Cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 385. 

> Cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 2, 269. 

° Hyginus (Lachmann, Gromatici veteres, 197) says: Excepti sunt fundi 
bene meritorum, ut in totum privati iuris essent, nec ullam coloniae munifi- 
centiam deberent, et essent in solo populi Romani. This raises the point 
whether Roman citizens living in non-Roman communities owned their 
property by Quiritary law. If so, their real estate would be virtually Roman 
soil. ‘The statement of Hyginus would imply that the possessions of favored 
individuals were so regarded. We cannot tell whether Hyginus includes 
Romans under the class of bene meriti. 

4 Cf. Hirschfeld, 98, n. 2. 

° For Caracalla’s purpose, cf. no. 192 and pp. 191 ff. 


D120 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


last step in this movement was taken by Diocletian. The 
vectigal lenocinit or capitulum Jenocinit was at first farmed 
out, but later collected by agents of the government!. 

In the later empire four important changes were made 
in the imperial system of taxation. For the first time, under 
Diocletian, a property tax was imposed on all the free 
cities in the provinces and on the cities of Italy. By this 
action the free cities lost in large measure their ex- 
ceptional position, and Italy, in the matter of taxation, 
was reduced to the level of the provinces. A systematic 
contribution of food, in the form of the aznona, was re- 
quired throughout the empire. In the third place assess- 
ments were based on certain fixed fiscal units, and finally 
comprehensive changes were made in the method of 
collecting taxes. 

To take up the second change, as we have already 
noticed, when the Romans acquired Sicily they took over 
the system of taxation which they found in existence 
there. They exacted from the Sicilian cities the payment 
of a tenth part of their produce. Part of this contribution 
was used for the army of occupation, part of it for the city 
of Rome. As the population of the capital grew and 
agriculture in Italy declined, the quantity of grain which 
the Romans needed from the island increased correspond- 
ingly. Consequently, in addition to the regular decumae, 
which constituted the sridutum of the island, alterae decu- 
mae were called for in times of need under a special law 
or decree of the senate. For this contribution a fixed price 
was paid’. Not infrequently a third contribution, the 
frumentum imperatum, was required. For this also payment 
was made. Rome paid too for the supplies delivered to the 
governor, the frumentum in cellam, or frumentum emptum, or 


PNG hoAOAt 2. CDT Ay 

3 Cf. Cic. in Verr. 3. 42: senatus cum temporibus rei publicae cogitur ut 
decernat ut alterae decumae exigantur, ita decernit, ut pro his decumis 
pecunia solvatur aratoribus; ut, quo plus sumitur quam debetur, id emi non 
auferri putetur. Cf. loc. cit. 3. 163, 172. 


[ 127 ] 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


annona, as it was called! It is significant of the future 
that even the civitates immunes were required to join in 
furnishing these extra supplies. Payment in kind, as in 
the case of Sicily, either in the form of a quota of the 
produce or a fixed number of measures of grain, was 
required in certain other provinces. On the other hand, 
from Macedonia and some other provinces a tribute in 
money was exacted. In the arrangements which were 
made in the early period we find all the elements out of 
which the system of Diocletian developed. Tribute was 
required from the civitates of the provinces in kind or in 
the form of money payments. Food was provided for 
the city of Rome and for the armies of occupation from the 
supplies which were levied as tribute and from those 
which were requisitioned, and the free cities, of Sicily at 
least, had to submit to requisitions. The development of 
the earlier system into that of Diocletian can be followed 
with some confidence. In the early days subject cities 
fell into classes. ‘Those of the first class were called upon 
each year for a fixed sum of money. Residents in the 
other cities were required to contribute a quota of their 
produce, or a poll tax, or both. Gradually the exaction of 
a quota from the second class of cities gave way to the 
contribution of a fixed annual amount in kind, and still 
later for the contribution in kind a fixed money payment 
was established for most of the provinces. The first change 
made it possible to do away with the tax-farmers; the 
second one relieved the state from the trouble and expense 
attendant on storage and carriage. Two circumstances, 


1 Cf. Rostowzew, R.E. 7, 165; Liebenam, R.£. 4, 2310; Marquardt, 
St. Verw. 2, 113. 

* Hyginus (Lachmann, Gromatici veteres, 205) says: Agri vectigales 
multas habent constitutiones; in quibusdam provinciis fructus partem prae- 
stant certam, alii quintas, alii septimas, alii pecuniam, et hoc per soli 
aestimationem. Certa pretia agris constituta sunt, ut in Pannonia arvi primi, 
arvi secundi, prati, silvae vulgaris, pascuae. His omnibus agris vectigal est ad 
modum ubertatis per singula iugera constitutum. ‘The taxes on public lands 
varied as the provincial tribute seems to have varied. 


[1284 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


however, in the later situation brought about a reversion 
to the earlier practices. The first of these two factors was 
the debasement of the currency, which began under Nero 
and had reached such a point under Gallienus that silver 
coins contained but 4 per cent. of silvert. The tax receipts 
in this depreciated currency left the treasury in great 
straits, and this situation in itself would have been 
sufficient to force a return to the practice of requiring 
payment in kind, but it was reinforced by the increasing 
demands for food of the city of Rome and of the armies. 
Weare not surprised, therefore, to find Diocletian making 
a contribution of grain a fixed part of the tribute levied on 
all the provinces, and, since this contribution was in- 
tended primarily for the annual supply of Rome, it was 
naturally called the annona*, The decision of the govern- 
ment to collect a large part of the taxes in kind put a 
tremendous strain on the imperial post, which was charged 
with the transportation of this produce, and we may thus 
understand the bitter protests against the post made by 
the agricultural classes, for the burden of its maintenance 
fell largely on them. Grain could be had only from farm 
land, and consequently this tax was laid only on the owners 
of such land. The objects of it were land, men, and animals. 
After a.p. 289 the rate of taxation and other pertinent 
matters were set forth each year in the indictio of the em- 
peror*. The owners of other property than farm-land 
continued to pay the tribute. Subject cities were called 
on for both the anzuona and the tribute, while civitates 


immunes probably contributed only the axnona?. 

1 Cf. Seeck, R.E. 3, 1515. Probably the mines of the empire did not 
produce a quantity of gold and silver sufficient for trade, and large amounts 
of the precious metals were exported to Arabia, India, and China; cf. Pliny, 
N.H, 12. 18, 82-84. 

2 Egypt and Africa, upon which Rome depended for supplies, had 
always continued to pay their tribute in kind. Consequently when the 
contributions of the other provinces, hitherto paid in depreciated currency, 
were converted into payments in kind, these two provinces were much less 
heavily taxed than the others; cf. Seeck, R.EZ. 3, 1516. 

S$ Cfenosps tars 6: 4 CfiSeeckn Rebs, E16, 5 [bid. 


AMA [ 129 ] 9 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


Diocletian based the assessment of taxes on a fiscal 
unit called the caput or iugum. A uniform tax was collected 
on all capita and iuga. A caput was the working power of 
a man in good health'. In the West this was the term 
commonly used of the fiscal unit. Less frequently the 
terms millena and centuria were employed. ‘Two women, 
a certain number of animals, or a fixed amount of land 
of a specified sort also constituted a caput. In the East the 
unit, when made up of men, women, or animals, was called 
a caput, when composed of land, a iugum. ‘Thus in the 
Diocese of the Orient a vineyard of five iugera, cultivated 
land of twenty iugera, or a certain number of olive trees 
made up a iugum*. The amount due on each iugum or 
caput was fixed by an imperial edict, and the taxes thus 
assessed were levied under the general supervision of the 
praetorian prefects, the vicarit, and the governors of pro- 
vinces. When the amount to be paid by a province had 
been determined, the governor apportioned it among the 
several cities within the province according to the number 
of taxable capita or iuga®. 

Diocletian’s system was devised to bring within its 
sweep all the property in the empire, and for convenience 

1 Cf. Seeck, R.E. 3, 1517, 1564 and the passage from the Cod. Th. 
13. 11. 2 there quoted: cum antea per singulos viros, per binas vero mulieres 
capitis norma sit censa. See also in general Seeck, R.E. 3, 1513 7; Lécri- 
vain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, 434 f7. and Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 224 ff. 
The value of the caput was somewhat changed by Theodosius the Great in 


A.D. 386. He rated five men or eight women as two capita; cf. Seeck, R.E. 
3, 1517 and Cod. Th. 13. 11. 2. 

2 Cf. Seeck, RE. 3, 1519; Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 221 ff. See also the 
description of the ivgum in a passage cited by Mommsen (Hermes, 3 (1869), 
430) from a Syriac collection of laws of a.p. sor and CJL. x, 407 and JG. 
XI, 3, 180, 182, 343-9. 

_® The inscription of the year 323 from Vulceii in Lucania (CJL. x, 407) 
cited by Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 2, 229, is very illuminating in this con- 
nection. It specifies the sum to be paid by the entire commune, and gives 
a list of the possessores, arranged according to pagi, with the amount to be 
paid by each taxpayer. Inscriptions from Thera and Astypalaea (JG. x1, 3, 
180, 182, 343-9) and fragments of inscriptions from Lesbos and Tralles 
(B.C.H. 4 (1880), 336, 417 #7) contain other pertinent information. 


[tees] 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


in discussion the people may be thought of as falling into 
three great classes, the possessores, the negotiatores, and the 
coloni. ‘The possessores, or owners of land or of other pro- 
perty, paid the azxoua or the tribute. The tax on the coloni 
or plebs rusticana extra muros, who presumably had no 
property, was the capitatio plebeia or humana. Perhaps this 
impost may be thought of as the lineal descendant of the 
tributum capitis of the earlier period, but limited in its 
incidence to the lowest class of freemen, and amounting 
essentially to a poll tax. The merchants, or xegotiatores, 
were subject to an impost called the co/atio lustralis or, 
more fully, the /ustralis auri argentive collatio. We find it 
first mentioned as aurum negotiatorium in the reign of 
Alexander Severus+. With few exceptions it fell upon all 
those who sold articles of any sort, and it was levied on 
the basis of the capital invested in the business?. As the 
name of the tax indicates, it was properly collected every 
five years or every four years, but evidently it was also 
frequently collected when a new emperor ascended the 
throne. Each new emperor found it very important to win 
the support of the troops by giving them largesses, and 
these gratuities had to be given in money. Thus, for 
instance, Julian on being made Augustus in the fourth 
century gave to each soldier five so#di and a pound of 
silver®. Each city was required to contribute a specified 
sum. Similar in character was the aurum oblaticium, theo- 
retically a voluntary gift of money made by the Roman 
senate on the accession of an emperor and on certain other 
occasions. 

The officials directly responsible for the collection of 
the taxes were the annually chosen exactores, who based 
the collection on the lists drawn up by the municipal 
tabularii, and gathered the taxes with the help of groups 
of susceptores, each group being chosen to take charge of 


LS CfOHUTS Aue. Ales 32.5. * Cf. Seeck, R.E. 4, 370. 
3 Cf. Ammianus, 20. 4. 18 and Seeck, op. cit. 4, 374 ff. 


Reick i 9-2 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


a particular kind of impost?. Decurions were generally 
selected as susceptores, and the exactores also were usually 
curiales. Even in Egypt, where the civic and fiscal arrange- 
ments at first differed in many respects from those which 
had been adopted elsewhere in the Roman world, the tax 
system under the later empire resembled in many ways 
that which has just been described?. The fact that a fixed 
amount was expected of each city and that the decurions 
of the city were called upon to collect this sum dealt a 
fatal blow to municipal government when the prosperity 
of the empire declined. Diocletian’s system presupposed 
periodical revisions of the census. If these had been 
made regularly and systematically, and if the taxes of a 
city had been reduced as its property declined in value, 
the cities could have borne their burden, but frequent and 
thoroughgoing revisions were not made, land was aban- 
doned, and tax-payers became insolvent’. In point of 
fact the imperial government could not see its way clear 
to reduce the running expenses of the civil and military 
establishments, and the situation was made worse by civil 
and foreign wars. When land was abandoned, some efforts 
were made to collect the lost taxes from adjacent owners4, 
to bring lands into cultivation again by settling co/oni upon 
them’, but in the end the responsibility of paying over 
the taxes to the government rested on the shoulders of 
the curiales®; their lands were made inalienable, they were 
forbidden to leave their civitas, or to escape their responsi- 
bility by entering the army, the civil administration, or 
even a cloister’, | 

The Egyptian tax system differed in some respects 


* Cf. Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, 436, col. 2. 

20Gf: pp. 133 f. infra and Wilcken, Grundziige, 356 ff. 

8 Cf. Lécrivain, op. cit. 434, col. 2. 

* Cf. Lécrivain, op. cit. 437, col. 1. 

; Cf. Humbert, Dict. Dar. s.v. deserti agri, 107, col. 2. 

Cf. Humbert, op. cit. 108, col. 1 and the references there given to 

Cod. Th. 12. 1. 543 Cod. F. 10. 72 (70). 2, and other sources. 

" Cf. pp. 103 fF, 206 fF. 


[aaa 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


from the system in vogue elsewhere in the Roman world 
and requires a few words of explanation. The revenues of 
the Ptolemies came chiefly from the rent of the land, for 
all the land in Egypt was owned by the crown. Certain 
monopolies also were controlled by the state and must 
have yielded a good profit. Taxes were levied on buildings, 
stock, and slaves, and a head tax was imposed from which 
Greeks and Macedonians were exempt. Artisans and 
traders paid a license fee. Export and import duties were 
levied. In addition to these taxes liturgies were imposed 
for such public purposes as surveying, the construction 
of irrigation works, the maintenance of the police, the 
entertainment of the court or of public officials on their 
journeys, and the billeting of troops!. 

The Romans made very few changes in the Ptolemaic 
system, and in respect to taxation the period from Alex- 
ander the Great to Diocletian may be regarded as a unit?. 
Two important changes were made, however, which were 
destined to affect the economic life of Egypt profoundly. 
The court at Alexandria to which tribute had hitherto 
gone was abolished by Augustus, and a tax of twenty 
million Roman bushels of wheat was demanded annually 
for the provisioning of Rome. The tribute paid to the 
Ptolemies had for the most part remained within the 
country, but there was no economic return for the wheat 
sent to the capital. In the second place certain changes 
were introduced in regard to the ownership of land by 
which private tenure was recognized. With the conse- 
quent growth of a propertied class, the introduction of 
such a liturgical system as prevailed in other parts of the 
Orient was made possible. The Ptolemaic administration 
had been carried on by a highly organized bureaucracy, 
in which service was voluntary and requited by the 


1 The subject of taxes in Roman Egypt is treated by Wilcken, Gr. 
Ostraka, 422 ff.; Grundziige, 169 ff.; eee Vie munic. 2347-3 385 f.3 
415 ff. 

2 Wilcken, Grundziige, 186. 


[eras 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


government. With the development of liturgies by the 
Romans, the Egyptians were forced to give their services 
to the state, and their property was liable to distraint in 
case of default or losses incurred in the discharge of their 
duty}. 

The Romans introduced a few new levies such as the 
tax on Jews, on manumissions, and on inheritances. The 
poll tax, which is mentioned only once in the Ptolemaic 
period, was applied more generally than had been the 
case in the previous period. The fixed price for the pur- 
chase of military supplies, in so far as it was below current 
market quotations, virtually constituted a tax on the pro- 
ducer?. 

The metropolis of each nome acted merely as an agent 
of the state in collecting the taxes. Apparently the city 
had no public revenue of its own, but in cases where ex- 
penses were incurred, the officials of the metropolis could 
draw upon the reserves of the state funds still on deposit 
in the local treasury, possibly under the supervision of the 
strategus of the nome®, 

When Septimius Severus gave a senate to the capitals of 
the nomes, it is probable that there was some reorganiza- 
tion of the financial status of the new cities, but the evi- 
dence bearing on the question is so slight that no clear 
picture of conditions can be presented. The chief revenues 
of cities in other parts of the empire came from lands in 
their territoria. ‘There is no evidence that Severus trans- 
ferred any of the crown lands to the new cities, but since, 
in creating a senate, it was his evident purpose to provide 
greater security for the proper discharge of liturgical 
duties, the new order may have had a greater measure of 
control of the imperial treasury in the metropolis which 
virtually guarded the revenues of the nome. Jouguet 
points out that the powers of the ozparnyds steadily 


1 Bell, Fournal of Egyptian Archaeology, 4 (1917), 86 ff. 
* Wilcken, Grundziige, 187, 356 ff, 374f. 
$ Jouguet, op. cit. 309 ff. 


[ eae 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


diminished in the third century until the office finally 
disappeared}. Its decadence may indicate that the state 
recognized in a passive way that the nome was municipal 
territory. Temple property (iepa yn) seems to have come 
under control of the local senates to a certain extent, and 
the state often assigned lands to communal organizations 
for forced cultivation?. By gifts, confiscation, and by the 
surrender of land which had been abandoned by owners 
for various reasons, the city acquired a certain amount 
of revenue and became the owner of new territory, 
although in the case of abandoned estates the city ex- 
perienced an increase in burdens rather than in revenues?. 
We hear also of water rates, rents of stands in the public 
market, and taxes on buildings*. It is possible that 
monopolies of mines and of oil were in some cases taken 
over from the state by the city and exploited in the latter’s 
interest®. It is probable, however, that the local adminis- 
tration was largely supported by the personal charges of 
the magistrates and of incumbents of liturgical offices. 
Legislation was enacted to restrain the extravagance of 
ambitious office-holders, who had raised the standard of 
outlay so high that it was often difficult to find candidates 
for office®. In some cases endowments were provided to 
relieve the expenses attached to liturgies’. Under the 
reorganization of the fourth century the system of taxation 
in the Egyptian municipality conformed to that in the 
rest of the empire®. 

To return now to another phase of general financial 
conditions in the empire, nothing need be said of the 
imperial taxes levied for a short period, but no clear 
idea can be had of the financial demands made on the 


1 bid. 386. 2 Wilcken, Grundziige, 126. 

3 Jouguet, op. cit. 418. 4 Ibid. 426. 

5 Ibid. 428; cf. no. 204, where the municipality exercises a certain 
amount of control over the guild of weavers. Ll. 1 ff. bear on the relation 
of the nome to the municipality in financial matters. 


BENNO 100, ? No. 189. Sel GCA GEE: 
[ 135 ] 


IMPERIAL TAXES AND 


provincials by the central government, unless one takes into 
consideration also the requisitions and other exactions to 
which the people in the provinces were subject especially 
under the republic. The Verrine orations of Cicero, his 
letters from Cilicia, the 4uzna/s of Tacitus, and the letters 
of Pliny give us abundant information on this point. Rich 
provincials, like Heraclius?, suffered the confiscation of 
their property on some legal pretext. Country districts 
were required to furnish wild animals for games to be 
given in Rome by some friend of a governor?. Extortion 
was practiced in securing the grain needed for the 
governor’s household?, and cities paid large sums for 
altars, statues, and festivals in honor of the governor’, 
for honorary deputations to Rome®, and for the privilege 
of being relieved from the billeting of soldiers®. The 
disastrous effect on the provinces of such practices as 
these is clearly shown in Cicero’s account of the condition 
of Cilicia when he took over this province from his pre- 
decessor, Appius’. With the establishment of the empire 
these abuses diminished. Provincial governors received 
an adequate salary, so that the temptation to fill their 
pockets by irregular means decreased. They held their 
offices for a longer term than republican governors had, 
and therefore came to know better the needs and difficulties 
of the provincials. The building of roads, the introduction 
of a postal system, and the establishment of provincial 
bureaus at Rome kept them constantly under the super- 
vision of the emperor, and the favor which the early 
emperors showed for the provincial assemblies gave the 
provinces an opportunity to lodge formal complaints 
against extortionate governors. Tacitus records eight 


nuCicuin Fer. 2. 35—42. S°Cicnad amet fia. 
My. 

Cic. in Verr, 2. 169-173. A CiCOpe tila 2A AAy? 
® Cic. ad fam. 3. 8. 2 ff. 8 Cionagea th Ghia Tg 


” Cic. ad Att. 5. 16. 2: Audivimus nihil aliud nisi imperata ériuxeparia 
solvere non posse, wvas omnium venditas; civitatum gemitus, ploratus: 
monstra quaedam non hominis, sed ferae nescio cuius immanis. Quid 
quaeris? taedet omnino eos vitae. 


[ 136 ] 


REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES 


cases of provincial governors tried by the senate under 
Tiberius, two under Claudius, and eleven under Nero, 
and in most of these cases the accused governor was 
convicted and punished. The bad practice of making 
contributions to the emperor, which were ostensibly 
voluntary, still continued, and in the later period these 
contributions, as we have seen, were converted into 
required money payments!. One new form of exaction 
under the empire, that connected with the cursus publicus, 
gave rise to endless complaints on the part of the pro- 
vincials?, In this connection the restriction placed on 
private enterprise in the provinces by the government 
ownership of mines and quarries, by the state monopoly 
in salt, and by the refusal to allow wine and oil to be pro- 
duced in certain districts may be mentioned ®, but does not 
call for extended comment. 


1 Cf. supra, pp. 131 f.3; Seeck, R.E. 3, 1543 /f6 
2 Nos. 51, 156. 3 Frank, Roman Imperialism, 210, 280 f. 


Maeva 


CHAPTER X 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES! 


1S HE residents of a civitas were practically exempt 


from the payment of municipal taxes. Local taxation 

could not be introduced, because the tax was a sign 
of servitude. Rome could exact tribute, because she was 
mistress of the world, but for citizens of a municipality 
to pay taxes to a government which they themselves had 
established was out of harmony with their way of thinking. 
At the most, municipal charges could be made for the 
enjoyment of certain privileges. A city’s revenues came 
largely from the serritorium owned by it. The cities con- 
quered by Rome usually owned land adjacent to their walls, 
and Rome commonly allowed them to retain at least a part 
of it. To the colonies an outlying district was assigned 
when they were founded?. Generals under the republic 
and emperors not infrequently gave large districts to a 
friendly or favored city. Thus S. Calvinus made large 
additions to the territory of Massilia, and the mother 
city, Ilium, received similar favors at the hands of em- 
perors. Occasionally a city received gifts of land from 
private persons®. Many of these dependent districts were 
of great extent. Nemausus had twenty-four oppida attri- 
buta, and Centuripae owned lands in many parts of Sicily?. 
Sometimes a ferritorium was far away. Arpinum, for in- 
stance, drew most of its revenue from land in Cisalpine 
Gaul®. For the use of such land dependent communities 


* In this chapter, in discussing municipal revenues and expenditure, 
frequent use has been made of the large amount of material collected by 
Liebenam, Sz. Verw. Cf. also Laum, Stiftungen in der gr. u. rim. Antike, 
for endowments in ancient cities. 

2 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 573 ff. 3 Liebenam, op. cit. 10 f. 

4 Pliny, N.H. 3. 4. 373 Cic. in Verr. 3. 108. 

° Cic. ad fam. 13. 11.1; CIL. v, 7749, 1. 25. 


[ 138 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


paid a fixed sum to the city treasury each year, as we can 
see from the famous award made to Genua in its action 
against the Langenses in 117 B.c.' Monopolies formed a 
source of municipal revenue in some cases. The banking 
privilege was controlled by eastern cities where they still 
preserved the right to issue a local coinage. The exchange 
of the native money for foreign currency was usually 
regulated by the municipality under imperial supervision 
and leased to private corporations?. The problem of 
industrial monopolies is obscure and little evidence can 
be found. Ferries seem to have been controlled by some 
seaport towns®. At Urso the charter threatens confiscation 
if anyone owns a tile or pottery factory above a limited 
capacity*. This clause may have been inserted because 
the industry was a municipal monopoly. In Egypt the 
towns took over certain industries from the state in later 
times®. A source of revenue came from the sale of the 
privilege of citizenship in more favored communities ®. 
Some cities owned the fishing privileges in adjacent lakes 
or rivers’, and these privileges were farmed out’. The 
municipal charges which came nearest to being taxes were 
the portoria, the octroi, and the water rates. Probably in 
the early period many towns were allowed to cover port 
duties into the municipal treasury. Athens, for instance, 
enjoyed this privilege at one time, and, as late as the fifth 
century, the Carian city of Mylasa recovered this right, 

1 No. ro. 2 Nos. 81, 133, 199; J.B.M. 1000. 


3 Nos. 70, 128; cf. P. Oxy. 1454 for municipal bakers, and no. 124 
for a strike at Ephesus. 

4 No. 26, chap. 76. 5 No. 204. 

6 No. 130; at Tarsus a fee of 500 drachmae was exacted for the grant 
of citizenship (Dio Chrys. 34. 23). Augustus forbade the Athenians the 
right of conferring such decrees for a price (Cassius Dio, 54. 7). 

7 No. 68. In this case the fisheries seem to be the sole source of municipal 
income. Cf. Strabo, 12. 8, p. 576. 

PUD ie ea) a Atay 

® Liebenam, op. cit. 24. In no. 96 the senate grants permission to 
establish a market (cf. nos. 147, 148). Was this permission required because 
of a state or municipal tax which was involved in the concession? 


[ 139 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


which it had enjoyed under the republic, for its harbor 
of Passalal. But gradually Rome took over in most cases 
the right to fix and receive port duties. An interesting 
list of duties imposed for the benefit of a municipality 
is furnished by the tariff of a.p. 137 of the inland city of 
Palmyra?. The dutiable articles include among other 
things slaves, cattle, salt fish, olive oil, and cloth. From an 
edict of Augustus found at Venafrum3, from the Palmyra 
list*, and from references in literature®, it seems clear 
that many municipalities laid an annual charge at least 
upon the proprietors of industrial establishments and 
private baths, upon the owners of large houses and villas, 
and upon others who drew a large quantity of water from 
the public supply. Some inscriptions, coming from 
Thessalian towns, show that in certain municipalities 
manumitted freedmen paid the fee for manumission into 
the municipal treasury. It is possible that these muni- 
cipalities acted as receivers for the imperial government, 
but it is more probable that the fee in these cases con- 
stituted a municipal charge and not an imperial tax®, In 
some oriental cities also priesthoods were sold to the 


highest bidders’, 
* CIL. 1, 8.7151; Dessau, Hermes, 19 (1884), 531. Possibly Vespa- 


sian’s edict made a similar concession to Sabora in Baetica, cf. no. 61. 

® This list was published in Aramaic and Greek. For the Aramaic 
version, cf. de Vogiié, Fournal asiatique, 8 (1883), série 1, 231 f3 ul, 
149 f/.; Schroeder, Sitzungsber. d. Berl. Akad. 1884, 417 ff. For the 
preface to the Greek version, cf. no. 89. The tariff at Zarai (CJL. vii, 4508) 
was imperial, not municipal, although the dutiable articles are similar to 
those mentioned at Palmyra. The tariff at Koptos (Ditt. Or. Gr. 674) was 
imperial. 

° No. 33. 4 Dessau, Hermes, 19 (1884), 522. 

> E.g. Cic. de lege agr. 3. Q. 

6 The fee for manumissions was usually taken by the imperial govern- 
ment (¢/. pp. 124 f.). That the payment was made to the municipal 
treasury in the case of the towns mentioned, cf. the inscriptions published 
in Eg. Apx. 1915, 8 f., 1916, 28 f., 73 ff, 1917, 7 ff 111 ff. in which 
the fact is recorded that certain manumitted freedmen paid the fee to the 
municipality according to law (card tov vopov). 


” Cf. p. 79 and n. 6. 
[ 140 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


Fines imposed for the violation of local ordinances or 
of the fundamental law of a city of course came into the 
municipal treasury, so long as the local magistrates ex- 
ercised judicial functions. Offenses of the first sort 
included infringement of traffic ordinances, displacement 
of termini, injuring public property, defiling sacred or 
public places, burying the dead within certain proscribed 
limits, and maltreatment of a tomb or place of burial. 
Hundreds of epitaphs have been found, especially in 
Italy and the Greek East, which threaten with heavy fines 
anyone who violates the sanctity of the tombs on which 
the inscriptions are engraved!. Sometimes payment is to 
be made to the imperial fisc?, sometimes to a priest- 
hood’, but commonly to the municipal treasury*. The fine 
threatened amounts in some cases to as much as 100,000 
sesterces®. Under what authority such fines could be im- 
posed is a matter of great dispute®. Was action taken 
under local ordinances, and did these ordinances fix the 
penalty or leave it to be determined by the builder of the 
tomb? These are difficult questions, which admit of no 
satisfactory answer as yet’. It would seem highly im- 
probable, however, that so many epitaphs should threaten 
the imposition of a fine, if it could not be collected by legal 
action. Perhaps the difficulty 1s explained by the fact that 
municipalities and imperial estates often laid out ceme- 
teries on their land and sold burial lots. In that case there 
would have been legal authority for the imposition of 
these fines. From this source therefore, in certain parts 
of the Roman world, some revenue would come into the 


1 Liebenam, op. cit. 43-53. 

= CIT. 111), 168. 3 Wilmans, 291. 

4 A typical case is CJL. 111, 2098: veto autem in hac arca alium corpus 
inferri aut ossua poni; si quis autem intulerit, dabit rei publicae Salonitarum 
nummum x milia. SE PVCIL: x, 2015: 

6 Liebenam, op. cit. 37 ff. and the literature cited by him, p. 37, n. 4. 

7 Some references to local ordinances have been found (Liebenam, 
op. cit. 42, n. 4) and sometimes the statements on tombstones specifying the 
fine are couched in legal form. 


[ 141 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


municipal treasury. The penalties for malfeasance in 
office or for corrupt practices in the elections were very 
severe. A duovir, for instance, convicted of receiving a 
gift from a contractor was subject to a fine of 20,000 
sesterces in the colonia Genetiva Julia, and in the same 
city any person making a gift with a view to his candi- 
dature for office was required to pay 5000 sesterces?. 

A surer and larger revenue, however, came into the 
city treasury from the voluntary or required gifts made by 
magistrates or priests on their accession to office. The 
charter of the colonia Genetiva Julia required each duovir 
and aedile to contribute out of his own pocket at least 2000 
sesterces toward the cost of the public games. The initia- 
tion fees in this case were unusually small, because the 
colonists were drawn from the Roman proletariat, and the 
sum mentioned in the charter is the minimum amount 
required, the summa legitima, to which officials often made 
large additions*. Inscriptions record the payment into 
the city treasury by magistrates and priests of sums 
ranging from 3000 to 35,000 sesterces. In one instance, 
at Calama in Africa, a newly elected pontifex contributed 
600,000 sesterces®. Mention of these initiation fees is 
made more commonly in the West than in the East. 
Their place was taken in the Greek Orient by the liturgy 
which was imposed there on the richer people in a city 
without regard to their incumbency of office. In fact the 
practice of requiring or expecting contributions from 
newly elected officials in the West may well have been 
suggested by the eastern liturgy. In addition to the 
required or voluntary contributions made by officials 
large gifts were made by private citizens for public pur- 
poses. The spirit of rivalry between the towns of a province 
made each one anxious to surpass its neighbors in the 


1 No. 26, chap. 93.  * Ibid. chap. 132. 3 Ibid. chaps. 70, 71. 
* CIL, vit, 8300: statuam quam ob honorem aed. super legitimam ex 
sestertium 1111 mil. mun. pollicitus ampliata pec. anno suo posuit. Cf. 


also vill, 4594. > CIL. vit, 5295. 
[ 142 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


beauty and magnificence of its buildings and streets, and 
the local pride which this sentiment developed laid an 
obligation on the wealthy to contribute generously to the 
construction and maintenance of temples, markets, and 
baths, the laying of pavements and sewers, and to the cost 
of public games and festivals. During the early centuries 
of our era, while the empire was prosperous, gifts of this 
sort must have formed an important part of municipal 
revenues. 

Let us turn now to the expense side of an ancient 
municipal budget. One of the items which bulks largest 
in its modern counterpart, the outgo for salaries, found 
no place in it. As we have just noticed, magistrates, 
instead of receiving salaries, helped to pay for the public 
improvements and running expenses of the city, and 
menial labor was performed by slaves which the city 
owned, so that only a few minor officials received pay. 
The public slaves cleaned the streets, took care of the 
public buildings, and performed other similar duties. We 
have left then to consider the construction and repair of 
public works, the prevention of fires, the policing and 
lighting of the streets, and provision for amusement, 
education, charity, the preservation of health, and the 
maintenance of religion. Of these items the expenditure 
for public works and for the amusement of the people 
made the heaviest drain on the city treasury. 

Those who visit today the sites of ancient cities like 
Pompeii or Timgad are surprised at the number and size 
of the basilicas, colonnades, baths, theatres, market halls, 
arches, and aqueducts which they find. Immense sums 
of money were spent on public works of these kinds, and 
thereby the financial condition of many cities was im- 
perilled. One may recall in this connection the expen- 
diture at Nicomedeia of 3,000,000 sesterces on an aqueduct 
which had to be given up?, and the appropriation 


1 Abbott, T’Ze Common People of Ancient Rome, 179 ff. 
2 Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 37. 1. 


EAN 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


of 10,000,000 sesterces at Nicaea for a theatre which 
was found to be structurally defective before it was com- 
pleted!. As we learn from the inscriptions, municipal 
funds for the construction of public buildings were 
lavishly supplemented by private gifts, and sometimes 
legacies were left for the maintenance of the buildings, 
but many cities must have found themselves the proud 
possessors of theatres, colonnades, and market halls, 
whose repair and maintenance made an intolerable drain 
on the public treasury when prosperity declined. Baths in 
particular were a source of great expense. Not only did 
they have to be repaired, but the cost of heating them and 
of furnishing oil to the bathers was heavy. The small city 
of Pompeii had three large public baths, and it would 
seem as if no town in the empire was small enough to get 
on without them. In 387 the emperor could find no more 
severe way to punish the people of Antioch for an uprising 
than to close the public baths of that city. An ancient item 
which is not to be found in a modern municipal budget 
was the cost of building and repairing the city-walls. This 
expense naturally varied from one period to another and 
was different for the different parts of the Roman world. 
For many generations after the position of Italy had been 
made secure, walls were allowed to fall into decay, but the 
pressure of the northern barbarians spurred the Italians 
on to improve their defenses. City-walls in the provinces, 
especially near the frontier, were always kept in better 
repair than those of Italy, and in the later period, when 
the empire was threatened on all sides, a large part of a 
city’s revenues had to be devoted to this object?. The 
paving of the streets and the nearby roads was of course 
a charge on the municipal budget, and must have been 
heavy because of the costly nature of the ancient system of 
paving. In the early empire the state assumed the cost 
of building and maintaining the main highways, but from 
the third century on this burden fell mainly on the 


1 Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 39. 1. Aled. \12u5.054. 35. 
[ 144 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


municipalities. The cost of constructing and maintaining 
the water and drainage systems in an ancient city must 
have been an important item in the municipal budget. The 
treatise of Frontinus for the city of Rome, the remains 
of aqueducts elsewhere, the large number of public and 
private baths, and the elaborate drainage system brought 
to light in Pompeii all testify to this fact}. 

Next in size to the outlay for public works, as we 
noticed above, came the expenditure for amusement, 
especially in the form of public games and festivals. The 
public udi circenses, ludi scaenict, munera gladiatoria, and 
venationes were given in connection with some religious 
festival or were in commemoration of some important 
public event, and rapidly increased in number under the 
empire*, until under Constantius II there were one 
hundred and seventy-six festivals each year in Rome?®. 
Numerous inscriptions referring to local public games, 
found in all parts of the empire, show that this form of 
amusement was as popular outside of Rome as it was in the 
capital. The cost of these games, except in so far as it was 
met by the contributions required of magistrates and by 
private gift, was defrayed by the municipality. The central 
government made earnest efforts to check this form of 
local extravagance, but probably without much success4. 
While the celebration of religious festivals constituted a 
heavy charge on the local treasury, a city was required 
to pay very little for the maintenance of religious cults, 
because most temples had endowments of their own®. The 
cost of policing and lighting the streets, and of protecting 
a city from fire, must have been very small, because little 
attention was paid to these matters®, Except in rare cases, 

1 Puchstein, R.Z. 4, 58 f. and literature there cited. 

2 For a history of this development, see Wissowa, Re/igion u. Kultus d. 
Rémer, 365-399. | 

3 CIL. 1, 293 f. and Wissowa, op. cit. 492-515. 

4 No. 110. The imperial tax upon the gladiators virtually fell upon the 
municipality or those who gave the shows. 


5 Liebenam, op. cit. 69 ff. LOMA AES 33 B57 for AOSy Mee: 
AMA i tat IO 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


municipalities paid out little money for education’, for 
public libraries?, or for charity®. In one respect only did 
the cities make a systematic effort to relieve the poor. 
Many of them imitated the capital in supplying grain to 
the needy at a low price*. This form of charity, if it de- 
serves to have that word applied to it, must be distin- 
guished of course from the a/imenta. Italian municipalities 
had some control over the a/imenta®, but they did not 
supply the funds for the purpose®, and therefore a 
consideration of this subject does not come within. the 
scope of this chapter. 

We are especially concerned with the attitude which 
the central government took toward the municipalities 
in the matter of their finances. In general it adopted the 
policy of rewarding those who were friendly and of 
punishing those who were hostile. For the firm stand 
which it took in favor of Rome in the Mithradatic war 
Sulla made several neighboring villages dependent on 
Stratonicea in Caria’. Amisus in Pontus won the favor 
of Lucullus and received an addition of one hundred 
and twenty stadia to its territorium®. On the other hand 
Caesar deprived Massilia of most of its zerritorium because 
of its opposition to him in 48 B.c.® Other instances of a 
similar kind occur in the later period. 

So far as the portoria were concerned, we have already 


1 Barbagallo, Lo stato e /’istruzione pubbl. nell’ Imp. rom. 

* For the city of Rome, cf. Boyd, Public Libraries and Literary Culture 
in Ancient Rome; for other cities, cf. Ltibker’s Reallexikon, 169 f. and the 
literature there cited, and Cagnat, Les bibliothéques municipales dans 
Lempire romaine. 

3 Liebenam, op. cit. 98 ff. 

* Ibid. 109 ff. ‘The compulsion to sell supplies at a fixed price, in so far 
as this was below the current quotations, virtually formed a tax upon the 
producers. Cf. no. go. 

5 Hirschfeld, 215 ff. 8 Kubitschek, R.Z. 1, 1484 f7. 

” B.C.H. 9 (1885), 437-474 and Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 
26 7337, 38, 81; no. 17. 

® Appian, Mitdr. 83; Plutarch, Luc. 19. 

° Cassius Dio, 41. 25; Florus, 2. 13; Oros. 6. 15. 7. 


[ 146 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


noticed that Rome followed the general policy of taking 
these over for her own use. She probably adopted this 
policy not only for the sake of the revenue which the 
customs duties brought her, but, if she had left the right 
of imposing them to the municipalities, some coast towns 
might have abolished their tariffs altogether, and diverted 
all the seagoing trade from their rivals. Perhaps reference 
is made to the assumption by the central government of 
the right of collecting the portoria in the brief account 
which Suetonius gives of the policy of Tiberius in this 
matter*. Certain of the later emperors, for instance, 
Hadrian, Alexander Severus, and Julian, reversed this 
policy and allowed the vectigalia to be paid into the 
municipal treasury®. In Hadrian’s case this act of gene- 
rosity may have been due to his interest in the provinces. 
Alexander Severus and Julian may well have made their 
concessions because of the financial needs of the munici- 
palities concerned. 

With the establishment of the empire came a better 
acquaintance with provincial conditions and greater sym- 
pathy with provincial needs. It is an interesting thing to 
notice that the last paragraph of the Res Gestae Divi 
Augusti records the generosity of Augustus toward cities 
destroyed by fire or earthquake*. The statement does not 
come from the pen of Augustus. It stands in a supple- 
ment which was added, probably, under the instructions 
of a local magistrate of “Ancyra. The rest of the appendix 
simply summarizes the document proper. The item in 
question, however, is not mentioned in the main body of 
the text. It seems therefore to be a tribute to Augustus, 
spontaneous or official, from the point of view of a 

* Cf. pp. 123 ff. 

2 Plurimis etiam civitatibus et privatis veteres immunitates et ius metal- 
lorum ac vectigalium adempta, Suet. 774. 49. 

3 For Hadrian’s action in the case of Stratonicea, cf. no. 83. Alexander 
Severus (Hist. Aug. Alex. Sev. 21) “‘vectigalia civitatibus ad proprias fab- 


ricas deputavit.”” Cf. Ammianus (25. 4. 15) who says of Julian, vectigalia 
Civitatibus restituta cum fundis. #\No. 38: 


Wee acl 10-2 


a 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


provincial living in a part of the world where the generosity 
of the emperor had been especially shown, and it may not 
be unnatural to think that the writer of it felt that the 
generous efforts of Augustus in behalf of cities in distress 
marked a new era in the relations between Rome and the 
municipalities. Both Suetonius! and Cassius Dio? speak 
of the help which Augustus gave to many cities injured 
by earthquakes, and we hear specifically of assistance 
rendered to Neapolis® and Paphos*. Tiberius followed 
this policy®, notably in the case of the fourteen cities of 
Asia which were destroyed by an earthquake ®, and similar 
acts of generosity are set down to the credit of Claudius, 
Nero, Vespasian, Titus, and of emperors of the second 
century’. The personal interest of Trajan and Hadrian 
in the provincial cities went still farther. Trajan built 
roads and bridges and dug canals in the Danubian region, 
in Spain and Egypt®, and the tribute of Hadrian’s bio- 
grapher that iz omnibus paene urbibus aliquid aedificavit® is 
abundantly confirmed by the records?®, The emperors were 
especially generous in helping cities to construct their 
aqueducts, and we have many inscriptions commemo- 
rating the assistance which they rendered for this purpose!. 
We have already had occasion to notice that as the danger 
from the barbarians increased it was necessary to rebuild 
and strengthen the walls of many cities!2, This measure 
was so vital to the safety of the empire that the central 
government sometimes devoted a part of the imperial 
revenue to this purpose and sometimes compelled a city 
to apply to it a fixed portion of its receipts. Alexander 
Severus helped cities to restore their walls, and Liebenam 
recalls the fact that Constantius in the year 358 turned 

1 No. 38 and cf. Suet. Aug. 47. * Cass. Dio, 54. 23 and 30. 

3 Ibid. 55. ro. * Jbidinauegt 5 Suet. Tid. 8. 

® CIL. x, 4842; Tac. Ann. 2. 473 4. 13. 

* Liebenam, op. cit. 172 /f. 

8 Schiller, Gesch. d. rim. Kaiserzeit, 1, 567 f, 


° Hist. dug. Hadr. 19, 2. 10 vy. Rohden, R.Z. 1, 516f. 
1 £.g. Liebenam, of. cit. 158, n. 1. 2 Of. supra, p. 144. 


[ 148 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


over one-fourth of the revenue from the vectigalia to be 
used in building the walls of the cities of Africa, and 
Diocletian recommended the diversion to a similar purpose 
of municipal funds collected for public games!. On the 
other hand, there was a growing tendency to put imperial 
charges on the treasuries of the municipalities. Cases in 
point are the building and mending of the roads and the 
maintenance of the cursus publicus*. 

We shall have occasion in another connection to see how 
the cities lost control in large measure of their own funds?, 
but it may not be inappropriate here to notice the way in 
which the imperial government was led to undertake the 
supervision of municipal finances. In his Verrine orations 
and in his letters from Cilicia Cicero describes the de- 
sperate condition in which the cities of Sicily and Cilicia 
found themselves in his day in consequence of the taxes 
and requisitions imposed upon them and the exactions 
of money lenders*. Many of these evils grew less under 
the empire, but the unwise and extravagant expenditure 
of money, in the eastern cities especially, frequently got 
them into serious difficulties. It was this situation which 
led the central government to interfere in their financial 
affairs. Perhaps a way was paved for such intervention 
by the establishment of imperial commissions to super- 
intend the spending of money appropriated from the 
imperial treasury for the rebuilding of cities destroyed by 
earthquakes or fire®. If the central government was to 
bring relief and assume a certain measure of control of 
local finances when the property of a city had been lost 
in a fire or destroyed by an earthquake, why should it not 
take some responsibility for the finances of a city which 

1 Cf. an inscription of a.p. 227 (Az. ép. 1917-8, no. 68): Infatigabile 
indulgentia domini Severi Alexandri Pi Felicis Aug. auctis viribus et 
moenibus suis castellan(i) cito Factenses muros extruxerunt curante Licino 
Hieroclete procuratore Aug(usti) praeside provinciae a(nno) p(rovinciae) 
cLxxxvill; cf. also Liebenam, op. cit. 144, n. and commentary on no. 157. 

2 Nos. 51, 156 and supra, p. 137. 3 Cf. pp. 200 ff. 
S.Gsapp..t2t ff. 5 "Tac. dan. 2,47 and supra, p. 147. 


[ 149 ] 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


was wasting its funds in elaborate stadia or theatres? To 
Pliny there seemed to be only one answer to this question 
for the cities under his jurisdiction, and when he found 
that the people of Nicaea had almost completed a theatre, 
which was structurally defective, at a cost of 10,000,000 
sesterces, and a gymnasium which was badly built, he 
at once intervened and turned to Trajan for advicet. In 
like manner, Claudiopolis was constructing a bathhouse 
on a badly chosen site”, and Nicomedeia had spent 
3,000,000 sesterces for an aqueduct which had to be 
abandoned?, and again Pliny asks Trajan what steps he 
shall take in the matter. Prusa petitions the emperor for 
permission to build a bathhouse*, and Amastris to cover 
a sewer’. Even for the free city of Sinope Pliny asks of 
Trajan the right to construct an aqueduct®, He takes 
cognizance of many other matters connected with the 
finances of the municipalities. Annual allowances made 
by Byzantium for the expenses of one legate to Rome 
and another to the governor of Moesia are cut off’. The 
extravagance attendant on weddings and festivals is 
limited 8. The propriety of requiring an initiation fee from 
men whose names are put on the rolls of the municipal 
senates is referred to Trajan ®. To him is referred the claim 
of Nicaea to the property of citizens who die intestate!®, 
and the right of the cities of Bithynia and Pontus to be 
preferred creditors!!, In one of his letters Pliny submits 
to Trajan a question that is one of the earliest indications 
which we have of the coming of the later ruinous policy 
of holding the decurions of a city personally responsible 
for its financial obligations!?, Some of the towns in Pliny’s 
province find it hard to loan their public funds at 12 per 
cent., and Pliny asks Trajan if he may force the decurions 
to borrow the money at this rate. The empire was not yet 
ready for this step, and Trajan did not approve the pro- 
1 Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 39. 1, 4. 2 Jbid. 39. 5, 6. 3 Thid. 27. 
4 Ibid. i *% Ibid. 98.-) eye eat Be 7 Ibid. ro 
® [did 116, 117. ° [bid 112. 1 Tbid. 84. 4 Tbid. 108. © Ibid. 54. 


Lig bows 


MUNICIPAL FINANCES 


posal. The most far-reaching question in the correspond- 
ence, connected with the imperial control of municipal 
finances, concerns the right of the governor to inspect 
municipal accounts. Pliny examined the accounts of 
Prusa without hesitation!, but when he proposed to look 
into those of Apamea, the people, while expressing a 
willingness in this particular case to submit to the scrutiny, 
stated that (rationes coloniae) numquam tamen esse lectas 
ab ullo proconsulum, habuisse privilegium et vetustissi- 
mum morem arbitrio suo rem publicam administrare?. 
Trajan, in his reply, advises Pliny to proceed with the 
examination, with the understanding that it will not 
prejudice their existing privileges. We can readily see, 
however, that this procedure in the case of a Roman 
colony set a dangerous precedent. We have followed the 
policy of Pliny in these matters in some detail, because it 
illustrates the paternal motives which actuated the im- 
perial government in exercising a close oversight over the 
finances of provincial cities. Under the republic such 
supervision was impossible, but in the time of Trajan, 
with a governor well supplied with subordinates, and 
holding office long enough to be thoroughly familiar with 
local conditions, and with bureaus in Rome ready to 
answer promptly all sorts of provincial inquiries, it was 
possible to supervise carefully the finances of every city 
of the empire, and it does not surprise us to find the 
practices which Pliny followed in controlling municipal 
expenditures given a systematic form by his imperial 
master through the establishment of the new imperial 
office of curator rei publicae®. 

No discussion of the finances of the municipalities 
would be complete without some reference to the method 
followed in the adjustment of financial controversies 
between neighboring cities, but the way in which these 
and other disputes were settled will be discussed in another 
connection 4. 

W101 170 PT bid.a7 > | * See ppigo gs) \* See pp.1s2'if: 


Litoey 


CHAPTER XI 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


cH HE principle of arbitral settlement of international 


disputes was familiar in the ancient oriental king- 

doms almost from the beginning of recorded 
history, but in the growth of great empires that equality 
between independent powers which is essential for the 
proper development of arbitration was destroyed!. In 
Greece the rise of a large number of small independent city- 
states produced ideal conditions for fostering this system 
of settling disputes, since war was uncertain in its results, 
and the loss of power and resources, even in a successful 
campaign, was not always compensated by gaining the 
point at issue. For this reason the disputants often pre- 
ferred to refer their quarrel to the decision of some 
neutral and impartial judge, or some friendly state might 
intervene with an offer of mediation or arbitration. 
Whether the Greeks borrowed this idea from the Orient 
or discovered it for themselves cannot be determined, but 
we owe to them the introduction of arbitration into Europe®. 
There are well authenticated examples of arbitral settle- 
ments in the seventh century, and as early as the fifth 
the Greeks had developed the principle so far that treaties 
were made containing a clause whereby the contracting 
parties agreed to settle in this way disputes which might 
arise in the future. Unfortunately the Greek states were 


+ The best treatment of the subject of arbitration in Roman history is 
found in De Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico presso i Romani. His classifica- 
tion of the different examples in Roman history has been followed in this 
chapter. Tod (International Arbitration amongst the Greeks) and Raeder 
(L’arbitrage international chez les Hellénes) have recently discussed briefly 
those cases of arbitration wherein Rome was called upon to decide disputes 
arising between Greek cities. Cf. Boak, Am. Fournal of International Law, 
15 (1921), 375 f. 

> Westermann, C.F. 2 (1906), 198; Tod, op. cit. 169 ff. 


[ 152 ] 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


no better than modern nations in observing treaty obliga- 
tions, and this provision was not always kept. A notable 
instance is the refusal of the Spartans to submit their 
dispute with Athens to arbitration before the outbreak of 
the Peloponnesian war. 

In the third century examples of international arbitra- 
tion among the Greeks are frequently recorded. Under 
this head we may include the disputes which arose 
between members of the great federal leagues that were 
usually settled by the central government, which also 
enforced the decision under the necessity of preserving 
internal peace and concord. In most cases of arbitration 
in this period we may note a tendency to appeal to some 
power or state whose prestige was great enough to make 
the decision respected. Thus the kings of Macedon were 
frequently requested to act as arbiters. After the conquest 
of Macedon, when Rome became a factor in eastern 
politics, the Greek cities frequently referred their disputes 
to the senate, and, in so doing, introduced the principle 
of arbitration into Roman political life. 

The history of Rome’s part in international arbitration 
is somewhat complicated by the relations existing between 
Rome and Greece after the issuance of the edict of Flami- 
ninus. While the Greek states remained virtually inde- 
pendent, Rome exercised a modified form of protectorate, 
and did not hesitate to interfere in the settlement of internal 
or inter-state quarrels. But so long as a city was nominally 
free and not incorporated in a Roman province, the 
settlement of its disputes with a neighbor by an appeal 
to Roman magistrates or to the senate may be considered 
as a true case of international arbitration. Since all such 
appeals came from Greek cities, the history of international 
arbitration in Rome began with her first contact with the 
East and ended when she became mistress of the Orient. 
Since the senate controlled the conduct of foreign rela- 
tions, all these disputes were referred to this body or to 
her agents who transmitted the appeal to Rome. The only 


fArsaay 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


recorded exception is the settlement of the dispute between 
Cnossus and Gortyna, which was decided by Appius 
Claudius and his fellow-commissioners!. In this case, 
however, the commission probably had plenipotentiary 
powers to examine the condition of Greek cities and to 
settle disputes. 

While the senate decided some of the disputes referred 
to it, certain questions such as the determination of 
boundaries could not be settled at a distance, and these 
were delegated to a special commission or to another state. 
The delegation of powers was made 1n a sexatus consultum, 
and the question to be decided by the arbitrator was often 
very narrowly defined. Thus in the dispute between 
Athens and Oropus, Sicyon was asked merely to deter- 
mine the penalty to be inflicted on Athens?. Magnesia 
on the Maeander was asked by Rome to arbitrate between 
Hierapytna and Itanus, but in so doing the only point to 
be determined was which state occupied the disputed 
territory at a certain date*. The dispute between Magnesia 
and Priene was delegated to Mylasa under the same 
conditions‘. | 

In the instructions given by the senate we find that there 
is often a desire on the part of Rome not so much to render 
a judicial decision on the point at issue, as to preserve 
the status which the disputants had held when they came 
into political relations with Rome. This policy may have 
been adopted for the purpose of cementing treaty rela- 
tions, but it is not altogether in accord with the principles 
of strict justice. Rome cannot justly be accused, however, 
of using the arbitral awards as a means of extending her 
power over the eastern cities. She did not use her extra- 
ordinary power either in enforcing the decisions which 
she or her delegates had pronounced, or in guaranteeing 


* Polybius, 33. 15. We may assume that Roman agents settled many 
other similar disputes in Greece. 


¢ Pausanias, 7-11. 4-8. 3 Inschriften von Magnesia, 105. 
Inschriften von Priene, 531; Inschriften von Magnesia, 93. 


Lat sany) 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


the terms of settlement. Athens not only appealed from 
the decision of Sicyon against her in the quarrel with 
Oropus, but even evaded the reduced penalty which the 
senate imposed by making a private settlement with 
Oropus!. In the dispute between Samos and Priene the 
senate confirmed a previous award made by Rhodes. In 
136 the case was again referred to Rome, but no change 
was made in the decision. Even after both cities had 
become incorporated in the province of Asia, the quarrel 
broke out afresh, and this time Mylasa was deputed to 
review the case*. Likewise the dispute over temple-lands 
at Delphi was reopened at least twice after Greece had 
become a Roman province*. In arbitrating the dispute 
between the Achaean League and Sparta the Romans 
exceeded their function in violating the sovereign power 
of both disputants. Sparta was required to remain a 
member of the League, but the latter was compelled to 
resign her judicial authority over Spartan citizens*. 

Where states were quasi-independent, possessing juris- 
diction over their internal affairs, but acknowledging the 
hegemony of Rome in foreign relations, inter-state dis- 
putes could only be adjudicated by a direct appeal to 
Rome, since the reference of the question to any other 
state would have been regarded as an offense to the 
sovereign power. In these cases the arbitration was not 
always purely voluntary, for if one side appealed to Rome, 
the other was virtually compelled to present its case unless 
it chose to let the judgment go by default. This class of 
arbitration is known as federal, since one or both of the 
parties to the dispute were bound to Rome by treaties of 
alliance. 

In the earliest recorded case of federal arbitration, if the 
traditional account in Livy is to be believed, two members 
of the Latin League quarreled over a piece of land, and 
when the dispute was referred to Rome, the comitia tributa 


1 Pausanias, 7. 11. 4-8. 2 Tod, op. cit. nos. 61-65. 
3 [bid. no. 26. 4 de Ruggiero, op. cit. 240 ff. 


Psst 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


took the matter out of the hands of the senate and voted 
that the land in question should belong to Rome?. There 
is much about this story which renders it unlikely, but if 
it is true, we can well understand why arbitration did not 
become popular amongst Rome’s allies in Italy. 

The dispute between Sparta and Messene over the 
possession of the ager Dentheliates forms one of the most 
interesting cases which come within the scope of federal 
arbitration. Philip of Macedon in 338 and Antigonus in 
221 had acted as arbiters in this long-standing dispute. 
Then Mummius in 146—5, if we may believe the account 
in Tacitus, pronounced a decision, but from the wording 
of the decree of the Milesians, it would appear that he 
merely recognized the status quo. Between 146 and 137 
the dispute was again brought before the senate, which 
referred the question to Miletus, at that time an inde- 
pendent state. The Milesians were instructed to determine 
only which of the two parties occupied the disputed terri- 
tory when Mummius was consul or proconsul. The 
Milesians chose by lot a court of 600, and when the 
evidence was heard the court voted 584 to 16 in favor of 
Messene*. It may be noted that no attempt was made to 
determine the legality of the claim of either party, but that 
Rome was concerned solely in determining the status of 
the territory when one or other of the two states became 
politically related to Rome. This solution of the problem 
was manifestly unjust, and showed undue favor to Rome’s 
allies. So Caesar, in his interview with Ariovistus, states 
it as an axiom of Rome’s foreign policy that her allies 
should suffer no loss, but rather should be increased in 
influence, dignity, and honor’, In this respect, then, 
Rome’s arbitral judgments were dictated by the desire to 
extend her influence and to bind her allies to her by 
shaping the arbitral awards in their favor. 

A somewhat similar situation is found in the dispute 
between Carthage and Masinissa, which seems to have 

1 de Ruggiero, op. cit. 268 ff. 2 Ibid. 283 7..7°% Caesar, 0 .G1. 43. 


[ 156 ] 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


been deliberately prolonged by the senate in order to 
weaken the power of her former enemy, now, however, 
formally regarded as an ally. In 193 the senate appointed 
a commission which made no decision, probably in 
obedience to secret instructions from the home authorities. 
Masinissa was thus encouraged in his acts of aggression 
and occupied other territory which, when Carthage 
appealed to Rome, was apparently granted to Masinissa. 
In 160 the injustice of Rome was still more flagrant in her 
award to the Numidian king, for Carthage was compelled 
to cede the town of Emporia in addition to the land which 
he had already occupied and to pay an indemnity of 500 
talents. When Masinissa seized further territory some 
three years later and Carthage appealed to Rome, the 
Carthaginians refused to entrust their cause to the 
arbitrators whom Rome sent out, and, apparently, the 
Numidian was allowed to remain in possession!. In 
Rome’s conduct of arbitral relations in these disputes we 
find one of the darkest chapters in her judicial history. 
No doubt the bitter prejudice against Carthage and high 
imperial policy dictated her decisions, but these con- 
siderations furnish no excuse for the violation of the 
principles of justice, and her guilt is the greater in that 
Carthage was bound to her by a treaty of friendship and 
alliance. In later federal arbitration Rome recovered her 
judicial sanity, since her position as a dominant power 
in the Mediterranean was secure. In the few cases of 
this class which belong to later times none gives any 
indication of favoritism on the part of Rome. As a matter 
of fact, the extension of Roman power in the last century 
of the republic had brought most of the ancient city-states 
under the Roman provincial system, and cases of inter- 
national and federal arbitration could no longer occur. 
While it is true that many of the cities still retained the 
nominal title of ‘‘free’’ or ‘‘allied’’ states, there are no 
records of disputes which arose involving them, and 
1 de Ruggiero, op. cit. 270 ff. 


Ly S57 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


apparently when once they had become incorporated in 
provinces, their disputes were settled by the central 
authority on the same basis as the disputes of other states 
under Roman dominion. This method of settling disputes 
is called administrative arbitration, and of this class we 
possess a large number of records, ranging from the begin- 
ning of provincial government up to the end of the third 
century of the Christian era, and found in every part of 
the empire. Most questions of administrative arbitration 
concern boundary disputes arising between adjacent 
municipalities, or between municipalities and state or 
imperial domains. Some of these quarrels were inherited 
from pre-Roman times, but others developed under 
Roman administration in cases where boundaries had not 
been definitely determined in the settlement of a province, 
or where the creation of new municipal organizations gave 
rise to litigation in the delimitation of territorial possess- 
ions. Disputes also arose over water rights in connection 
with rivers, or over roads, or took the form of quarrels 
like that between Pompeii and Nuceria. In these cases 
the local authorities were without jurisdiction, and the 
sovereign power was called upon to settle the dispute. It 
was impossible for cities in such cases to have recourse 
to war or to choose some foreign state as arbiter, since 
either procedure would have been offensive to the sove- 
reign power of Rome. While the /ex Rupilia allowed 
Sicilian towns to call upon another city to decide disputes 
arising between them and their citizens, there is no 
evidence that similar latitude was allowed in boundary 
settlements, although Mucius Scaevola invited Sardis and 
Ephesus to settle their differences by arbitration and to 
call in any city which they chose as arbiter!, Not in- 
frequently a third state was appointed as arbiter in dis- 
putes which arose between Greek cities, but more com- 
monly the senate, or emperor, named a special commission 
or some official to act. In such cases the delegated power 
* Cicero, in Verr. 2. 12. 13; Inschriften von Pergamum, 268. 


[E5378 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


was plenipotentiary, and the decision was not subject to 
review by the central authority. 

When the local authorities were not able to control 
internal factions, and the magistrates appealed to the 
central government, or, as 1n one case, to the patron of the 
city, the settlement of the dispute was sometimes arranged 
by arbitration, which may be classed as administrative. 
Sulla was delegated by the senate to settle a quarrel among 
the citizens of Puteoli, and to frame a new constitution for 
the city!. In imperial times the senate appointed two of its 
members to settle a similar dispute in this city. In Pompeii 
the patron of the town was accepted by both factions as 
arbiter apparently without any reference of the quarrel 
to the senate*. Doubtless the numerous commissions and 
special agents sent out from Rome to the provinces acted 
as arbiters in settling the disputes of party factions, and in 
so doing they favored the aristocratic class. Although the 
local authorities were empowered to settle all questions 
concerning internal affairs, the sovereign power exercised 
by the senate or by the emperors gave them authority to 
interfere in the local affairs of all provincial cities. By 
virtue of this authority Trajan and his successors appointed 
the curatores rei publicae and correctores, by whom local dis- 
putes were settled by administrative processes without 
recourse to arbitration. 

A third class of cases of arbitration may be distinguished 
in the disputes which arose between cities and private 
individuals, whether alien or resident citizens®. As we 
have already indicated, the /ex Rupilia allowed Sicilian 
cities to call upon the services of another city in arbitrating 
such disputes, and this arrangement was probably allowed 
in other provinces. But where the local authorities 
possessed jurisdiction, cases of appeal to arbitration are 
comparatively rare, nor was the appeal necessarily made 
to Rome, or to the governor, but could be made to another 


1 Plutarch, Su//a, 37. 2 Cicero, pro P. Sulla, 21, 60, 61. 
3 de Ruggiero, op. cit. 96 ff. 


[up BSO.0} 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


city in the province or to a private citizen. In most cities, 
however, the local magistrates did not have jurisdiction 
over Roman citizens, and in disputes arising between a 
city and Romans the case must of necessity be referred 
to the governor, who, however, had the right to appoint 
arbiters if he so desired. 

Finally, there is a series of disputes which arose between 
the cities and the Roman state, or rather its representatives 
—the publicanst. We may also include here the boundary 
disputes arising over the municipal lands and those of the 
state or of the emperor. In such cases the state might 
settle the dispute by regular administrative methods, but 
in some instances the question was referred to the decision 
of an arbiter appointed by the senate or by the emperor. 

Arbitral procedure was foreign to Roman policy and 
was introduced only through contact with, and under 
the influence of, Greek culture. Its continuance in imperial 
times was apparently determined by a desire on the part 
of the central government to flatter the vanity of the city- 
states which had been incorporated in the empire. In the 
third century the military autocracy was no longer in- 
fluenced by these motives, and records of arbitral judg- 
ments disappear. Henceforth the settlement of all 
disputes passed to the regular provincial courts or became 
a matter of ordinary administrative routine. 

The special relation which civitates foederatae bore to 
Rome ceased to exist in Italy after the towns received 
Roman citizenship. In other parts of the empire very few 
states enjoyed the privilege of foedus aequum with Rome, 
Some of these jealously maintained their rights, as, for 
example, when the Amiseni appealed to Rome in regard 
to the law forbidding the organization of clubs in Bithynia2. 
Trajan replied that if the laws of the city permitted such 
associations, the imperial authorities could not forbid them 
provided the clubs were not devoted to seditious or illegal 
gatherings. There is an undertone in Trajan’s letter which 


* de Ruggiero, op. cit. 99 ff; nos. 12,18. 2 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 92, 93. 
[ 160 ] 


ARBITRATION AND TREATIES 


implies that treaties would be respected only if they did 
not contravene the best interests of Rome. In 210 the 
Camerinians thanked Septimius Severus for confirming 
the right of foedus aequum, and in Astypalaea the treaty 
with Rome was maintained as late as the reign of Gordian}. 
The lex de imperio Vespasiani placed the power of making 
treaties in the hands of the emperor, confirming the 
privilege which Augustus had held. The economic 
pressure which began to be severe in the second century 
probably led many cities to surrender their special privi- 
leges. Thus we find an imperial corrector in Athens under 
Hadrian*. The edict of Caracalla probably swept away 
other treaties when the cities accepted Roman citizenship, 
although it is evident that Astypalaea preserved her status 
as a civitas foederata for some time longer. 

In the eastern empire coins were frequently struck 
celebrating the oudvora of various states®. It is impossible 
to determine exactly what is meant by this term under 
Roman rule, but it seems to indicate that the Romans 
permitted these states to conclude some form of treaty 
which flattered their vanity and infringed in no way on 
Roman sovereignty. With the development of the 
bureaucracy and the military autocracy the fiction of 
sovereignty which the Romans had permitted as a matter 
of policy soon disappeared. 


1 GIL, x1, 5631. 2 CIL. vin, 7059. 


3 Head, Historia Nummorum, 5.0. 6povou.a. 


AMA [UsrO tsa II 


CHAPTER XII 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


senate treated with each city and each tribe as an in- 

dividual unit. Under the republic the governor, who 
was sent out with the imperium, had no tribune to interpose 
a veto on his acts, and the provincial subjects had no means 
to check illegal action or extortion except through indirect 
pressure applied by their patron in Rome. After the 
governor laid down his command, he might be prosecuted 
before a jury made up of members of the senate, but it 
was difficult and practically impossible to secure a con- 
viction before a court of his peers. Later, when the juries 
were composed of members of the equestrian order and 
party feeling had become intensified, convictions were 
easier to obtain, although the court was not so much 
prompted by a desire to secure justice for the provincials 
as it was concerned in furthering the interests of the 
equites. In appearing before the court the provincials 
had no other bond than their common interests, and each 
city acted singly, or their delegates represented munici- 
palities which had united to present their complaints 
before the senate. Since it was the policy of the Romans to 
discourage combinations of the different communities in 
each province, it is very unlikely that the Jex provinciae 
provided any machinery for common action, but in the 
informal meeting of representatives of two or more towns 
for the discussion of matters of mutual interest we may 
discern the beginnings of a provincial assembly}. 


|: the organization of a conquered province the 


1 Marquardt, de Romanarum provinciarum conciliis et sacerdotibus; 
Guiraud, Les assemblées prov.; Carette, Les assemblées prov. de la Gaule 
rom.; Fougéres, de communi Lyciorum; Monceaux, de communi provinciae 
Asiae; Dict. Dar. s.0. xowédv; Kornemann, R.E. 5.0. concilium, xowov; 


BEAter a7 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


In the East the Romans found a large number of rowa 
already existing, of which some were religious organiza- 
tions, and others political federations. In Greece Flami- 
ninus encouraged those which might serve to check the 
power of Macedon. After the sack of Corinth by Mum- 
mius political unions were suppressed in the fear that 
they might form centres for the revival of a national 
consciousness!, Later the ban was removed and the 
assemblies were permitted to meet for religious purposes. 
Similar organizations existed in Asia, and shortly after 
the province was established we find games instituted by 
the cities in honor of the governor, Mucius Scaevola, who 
held the office about 98 B.c.2 Antony addressed a letter 
to the xowdv of Asia granting certain privileges to the 
guilds taking part in the provincial games?. This action 
must have been taken in response to a request from the 
assembly and, although no political issue was involved, 
it is apparent that the delegates from the cities of Asia were 
developing an organization in which questions of common 
interest might come up for discussion. 

In 29 B.c. the cities of Asia in their provincial organiza- 
tion requested that they be allowed to establish the cult of 
Roma and Augustus at Pergamum?#._ In granting their 
request the emperor established a precedent which was 
soon followed by the other provinces. In some cases we 
find two distinct provincial assemblies, as in Bithynia- 
Pontus, Galatia, Lycia-Pamphylia, and Syria. In Achaea 
the local xowd of Central Greece united their assemblies 
in a joint federation which seems to have represented the 
province®. Thessaly preserved the independence of its 


Krascheninnikoff, Philol. 53 (1894), 147 f7.; Ramsay, Fourn. Rom. St. 
12 (1922), 154 ff. 

1 Pausanias, 7. 16. 9. 2 Ditt. Or. Gr. 438; Ditt. Sy//3 760. 

3 Brandis thinks that Antony established the provincial cozci/ium in 
Asia about 33-32 (Hermes, 32 (1897), 512 f7-). 

SY Lac Aanas 47 3 Cass. Did, 5Tai20 

5 We find this prescript: TO Kxowdv tov “Ayatov Kai Bowrov Kai 
Aoxpov kat EvBoéwv kat ®woxéwv, LG. vit, 2711. 


Dey pus: 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


assembly, since this district was separated for adminis- 
trative purposes from the rest of Greece and placed under 
the control of the governor of Macedon in the imperial 
period. While the meeting-place of the provincial cowov 
was usually fixed in some convenient centre, the leading 
cities of Asia, Lycia, and Lycaonia shared the honor in 
rotation. 

In the West the provincial assemblies were slower in 
developing than in the East. Municipal institutions re- 
placed the tribal units slowly and the majority of the 
provinces lacked the political traditions of the Orient 
which might have given them a feeling of unity. Outside 
Gaul there was no common cult such as had united many 
Greek cities in their xowa. Moreover, the religious 
mentality of the western peoples differed widely from that 
of the Orient, and was less facile in adopting new cults, 
especially in accepting a cult which deified a reigning 
emperor. We have already seen that even under the 
republic the western provinces had informal organizations 
in which the cities could unite in conducting prosecutions. 
of officials and in sending embassies to Rome. An edict 
of Augustus forbade the provincials to take any action 
in praising a governor until sixty days after he left his 
province}, but it is not necessary to infer that provincial 
assemblies existed generally at this period (2 B.c.). The 
first formal organization of such an assembly may be 
found in Tres Galliae when Drusus called representatives 
of the various civitates to Lugudunum in 12 B.c. The 
worship of the imperial cult was founded at that time 2. 
This gathering formed the nucleus ofa provincial assembly 
which met annually thereafter at the same place. Ina.p. 15 
the cities of Hispania Tarraconensis requested the privi- 
lege of founding a temple of Augustus in Tarraco, and 
Tacitus observes that the granting of this petition formed 
a precedent for other provinces. This would imply that 


1 Cass. Dio, 56. 25. 2 Kornemann, op. cit. 809 f. 
8 ‘Tac. dun. 1. 78. i He 


[ 164 ] 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


the initiative was taken by the provincial cities and not 
by the central government, although the theory has been 
advanced that the assemblies were founded by the em- 
perors in some cases in order to hasten the Romanization 
of the provincet. We might infer from the remark of 
Tacitus that the example of Spain was soon followed by 
other provinces, but there is no evidence which enables 
us to date the foundation of the other assemblies, nor can 
we determine whether they were created in all the pro- 
vinces of the empire. In the fourth century these organiza- 
tions were made obligatory by imperial mandate. 
Primarily, the provincial assemblies were charged with 
the annual services of the imperial cult, the care of the 
temple, and the celebration of games in honor of the deified 
emperor. However, when the delegates met to transact 
their official business, they discussed also matters of 
general interest, and the administration of the governor 
and his subordinates came under review for praise or 
blame. For the first time, therefore, the provincial cities 
had an official organization in which they could voice their 
opinion collectively in regard to the administration of 
their governor, and since his future career in public ser- 
vice might be largely determined by the action of the 
assembly, it was a powerful influence in securing better 
government in the province. In the case of dishonest and 
corrupt officials, the assembly under the empire took upon 
itself the duty of prosecuting the offender at Rome 
before the senate or the praetorian prefect. The earlier 
emperors doubtless encouraged this phase of the assembly’s 
activity in order to keep a closer check on governors, 
especially in senatorial provinces. At any rate a large 
number of accusations were lodged in Rome against pro- 
vincial officials during the first century”. Later, when the 
imperial bureaucracy had developed more fully and 
agents of the emperor were sent out to the provinces and 
to individual municipalities, the number of prosecutions 
1 Krascheninnikoff, op. cit. 168 ff. 2 Guiraud, op. cit. 172 ff. 


[ 165 ] 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


steadily diminished, and the influence of the assemblies 
was apparently weakened. m 

The relation of the provincial assemblies to the munici- 
palities is obscure. Each municipality, or each tribal unit, 
sent a certain number of delegates to the assembly, and in 
Achaea it is possible that the smaller kowa were repre- 
sented in the provincial organization, either by delegates 
or, though less probably, in a body. The chief priest was 
elected annually by the assembly from candidates nomi- 
nated by the municipalities. He presided over the meetings 
of the assembly, and defrayed the expenses of the sacrifices 
and games as a form of liturgy?. In the ancient Kowvov of 
Lycia the delegates were appointed according to a system 
of proportionate representation, the cities being graded 
in three classes, of which the first sent three delegates, 
the second two, and the third one each. In the age of the 
Antonines the cities of Asia, and presumably those of the 
other provinces, were graded in a similar way for the 
distribution of the gift of immunity to teachers and 
physicians*, It is therefore possible that the Lycian 
system of representation was universally adopted in im- 
perial times, but there is no evidence on the subject beyond 
the fact that some cities sent more than one delegate, and 
that there were at least 150 members of the xowdv of 
Asia*, In Bithynia the members were sometimes appointed 
for life, although this distinction may have been purely 
honorary, as was true in the case of the life-appointment 
of the provincial priest, and of other liturgies which had 
been discharged with special merit. 

In the proceedings of the assembly there is no evidence 
that mandatory instructions were given to its delegates by 
the civic government, but they were undoubtedly aware of 


+ Guiraud, op. cit. 82 fF. ? Strabo, 14. 3, p.664. 3 Dig. 27. 1.6, 

* Buckler and Robinson, 474. 18 (1914), 356. In Aristides (p. 767 
Dind.) 407 votes are recorded as cast in a meeting of the assembly. 

© Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 7. Brandis, however, believes that the title does not 
refer to membership in the provincial assembly. 


[1664 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


public opinion and were guided accordingly. In the in- 
scription from Thorigny it is recorded that the delegates 
gave up their attempt to attack Paulinus on the protest 
of Sollemnis!. Had they received a mandate from their 
respective cities, they would hardly have desisted on the 
protest of a single delegate from one state. Timarchus of 
Crete is said to have boasted that the power of granting 
an honorary decree to the retiring governor rested in his 
hands*, In later times the governor undoubtedly found 
means to control the election of deputies through the 
power which he exercised in municipal affairs, and this 
fact may account in part for the decreasing importance of 
the assembly in the second and third centuries in indicting 
provincial governors. 

Since the assemblies met but once a year, administrative 
matters of local interest were probably referred directly to 
the governor, or a delegation was sent to the emperor by 
individual cities who were eager to bring themselves to 
imperial notice. Occasionally, however, joint action was 
taken. Thus Asia honored T. Claudius Amphimachus for 
an embassy by which he undertook to secure a remission 
of the inheritance tax (eixoary)?. When Domitian forbade 
the cultivation of the vine in Asia, the provincial assembly 
sent Scopelianus to Rome, and he succeeded in having 
the decree revoked*. The same assembly asked Caracalla 
to fix Ephesus as the port where the new governor should 
land in coming to his province®. While an advocate 
(€xduxos) is mentioned in the case of the provincial 
assembly in Asia only ®, it is probable that this official was 
attached to other assemblies as well, and, although his 
duties are nowhere defined, we may assume that he bore 
the same relation to the assembly as the municipal 


1 No. 140. 2 aca etag.nb 20, 

3 Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1236; Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der 
Wiener Akademie, 54 (1911), no. 53. 

4 Philostratus, Vit. Soph. 1. 21. 12. 

S DIE A. L084, t5: Vie AES (1934 )s-95 9: 


skeen 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


advocate to the city, and that one of his most important 
duties was in connection with the prosecution of provincial 
officials. 

The only example of a provincial decree which was man- 
datory in the cities is found in Asia, where the assembly, at 
the request of the governor, adopted the Julian calendar 
throughout the province}. This business was apparently 
entrusted to the assembly because of the importance of 
the matter in connection with religious observances— 
especially with those relating to the imperial cult. Titus 
wrote to the Achaeans, probably to the assembly, about 
the exposure of infants, although Domitian and Trajan 
communicated with the provincial governors on this sub- 
ject?. Antoninus wrote to the province of Asia forbidding 
the unrestricted grant of immunity from liturgies by the 
municipalities, and regulating the number of such grants 
which could be made in each city%. It is probable that 
this letter was addressed to the provincial assembly. It 
would seem that the assemblies had no administrative 
power over the cities of the province except in matters 
pertaining to the imperial cult, the games in honor of the 
emperor, and in cases where they received a mandate from 
the governor or emperor. The governor had the right of 
taking part in the regular proceedings of the assembly, 
and even in the case of honorary decrees could exercise 
the right of veto. The assembly could, however, appeal to 
Rome over the governor’s veto, and in one case the 
emperor reversed the action of the governor, whereupon 
the decree became law4. 

The ancient xowdv of Thessaly had the privilege of 
granting citizenship and the right of owning property in 
any city of the federation®, Under Roman rule similar 


1 No. 34; Ditt. Or. Gr. 458; Keil and Premerstein, of. cit. no. 166. 

2 Pliny, Ep. ad Trai. 65. 3D 12.02.74 14.03 

4 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, chaps. 24, 26, 28. Whether the governor 
called together the provincial assembly may be doubted, cf. Ditt. Or. Gr. 
494, Nn. SAG SAK 92 1507515 00s 


(Croom 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


privileges were apparently enjoyed by a few provincial 
assemblies. In Lycia officers of the assembly were some- 
times recorded as citizens of one or more towns, and the 
additional qualification is added qodurevdpevos dé Kal év 
Tats Kata Avkiav 7odeot wacats. This phrase seems to 
imply that the official named exercised the rights of citizen- 
ship in all Lycian cities!. The citizenship in specified 
municipalities is contrasted with that in all the cities, and 
it may be possible that a form of honorary citizenship 
was conferred by the assembly. The cowov of Asia con- 
ferred the title of "Acuavos on Isidorus, the son of Meno- 
genes, who was provincial advocate*. It is probable that 
this title implies a kind of honorary provincial citizenship. 
The tragic actor C. Julius Julianus was a citizen of 
Smyrna and enjoyed the rights of citizenship in all Hellas, 
Macedonia, and Thessaly (wohurevbets de & On TH 
‘EAAdOt Kat Makedovia kal SBecoadia). This claim 
may be an idle boast, but more probably his services at 
provincial festivals won him the grant of honorary citizen- 
ship?. 

The various municipalities which were members of the 
assembly contributed to the expenses of the organization, 
such as those required for the games, the religious cere- 
monies, buildings, repairs, maintenance of staff, embassies. 
They also met the charges in connection with the prosecu- 
tion of officials and the erection of statues*. There is a 
record of an endowment fund for the games in Asia, but 
the games were usually regarded as a liturgy pertaining 
to the priesthood. An African inscription dated a.p. 366 
shows that this liturgy had become so burdensome to the 
candidates that the governor intervened by reducing the 
scale of extravagance which had hitherto prevailed®. Not 


1 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 527, 539, 603, 628, 704, 739, chap. 5. In some 
cases, however, the phrase seems to imply the discharge of municipal 
liturgies, cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 563, 584, 680. 

SATA AES COTA) AZ22 if. 3 IG. v, 1, 662. 

4 Guiraud, op. cit. 128 ff. 5 No. 110; cf. Dessau, 1256. 


Reet eren iy 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


infrequently the cost of buildings or of statues was de- 
frayed by the emperor; embassies were undertaken by 
private citizens at their own expense; and statues were 
often erected by the individual on whom the honor had 
been conferred. 

If we except the ‘‘Altar’’ series of Lugudunum issued by 
the authority of the emperor, western assemblies possessed 
no right to coin money?. In the East silver coins were 
issued by towns and provinces, usually with imperial 
sanction and control. In Crete the provincial issue re- 
placed that of the individual towns*. Bronze or token 
money seems to have been issued by any organized city- 
community that chose to exercise the right, and the pro- 
vincial xowa not infrequently issued communal bronze 
coinage®. There is no evidence that the provincial assembly 
exercised any control over the coinage of the cities. Since 
the imperial government probably determined the rate of 
exchange between the various currencies, it is probable 
that the revenue derived from the mint was slight, if any. 

Officials of the provincial assemblies sometimes held 
other positions. In Gaul the chief priest was appointed 
to some duty in connection with the census, and another 
official was patron of a guild of boatmen, but it would be 
unwise to infer from these examples that the assembly 
exercised any control over taxation or trade*. Opramoas, 
archiphylax of Lycia, made arrangements for securing 
order (eipyvy) and supplying provisions (ev@nvia) at an 
annual meeting of the assembly®. He alsoadvanced money 
as a loan to those provincial cities which had been unable 
to make up their annual quota of imperial tribute. Rostow- 
zew thought that the assembly, through its officials, con- 
trolled the municipal irenarchs, sitonae, and decaproti, but 
this interpretation of the activities of Opramoas is hardly 


1 Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum, 1, xvii ff. 
2 Ibid. 1, xxv; R.E. 5.0. xowov. 3 Tbid. 1, xxvii. 


4 Kornemann, op. cit. 815 ff. 5 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, chap. 5. 
[ 170 ] 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


justified!. There must have been some co6peration between 
local and provincial officials at every meeting of the 
assembly, but it is unlikely that the local government 
surrendered its autonomy in any respect. The loan made 
by Opramoas to the cities was a political investment 
against the time when he should be a candidate for higher 
office in the assembly. Other Lycian inscriptions show 
that provincial officials sometimes contributed to the taxes, 
erection of public buildings, or cost of games”. These 
payments were not a regular liturgy attached to their 
post in the assembly, but were undoubtedly voluntary 
obligations undertaken from the same motive which in- 
fluenced Opramoas. It is also recorded that the chief 
priest of the Macedonian assembly paid the head tax for 
the province and provided grain at reduced prices during 
a famine which occurred in his year of office®. The 
assumption of these voluntary obligations was a dangerous 
precedent, which might easily have developed into a 
regular liturgy attached to officials in the provincial 
assemblies, especially if the pressure for the payment of 
imperial taxes had become severe at the time the gifts were 
made. 

Apart from the prosecution of government officials, the 
provincial assemblies seldom, if ever, took the initiative 
in political matters. One doubtful instance may be men- 
tioned here. In a.p. 70 the Treveri sided with Sabinus in 
his revolution. —The Remi summoned a provincial con- 
cilium which asked the Treveri to lay down their arms*. 
The appeal was not heeded and the assembly—whether 
regularly constituted or not, it is difficult to determine— 
had no power to enforce its request. 

When the city of Sidyma established a gerusia, the 
governor of the province was notified of the fact by the 
Lyciarch. The latter, however, was a citizen of Sidyma 


1 Rostowzew, Gesch. d. Staatspacht, 418 ff. 
2 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 704; 739, p. 298. 
3 *Apx. AeAr. 1916, 148. Ob aGuliiss,. 42:67, 0917/7. 


[oar h} 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


and it is probable that he acted in his private capacity as 
a resident of the city, rather than as an official of the pro- 
vincial assembly}. 

The assemblies frequently appealed to Rome for 
decisions on points of law and procedure, as we may infer 
from the frequent communications of the emperors to the 
provincials recorded in the Digest and Codes?. Only in 
Lycia, however, do we find any evidence of a provincial 
court under the control of the assembly. The records of 
the xowov of this province refer to specially summoned 
courts which were apparently under the control of the 
assembly. Unfortunately we have no other information 
which would help us to determine the relation of these 
courts to those of the Romans or of the municipalities. 
It is probable that they were constituted by the xouvdv to 
settle disputes between municipalities which preferred the 
native to the Roman law, or they may have been called 
together to decide violations of the law in connection with 
the annual games and ceremonies of the assembly. Opra- 
moas, as archiphylax of Lycia, was entrusted with judicial 
power by the governor, although it is doubtful whether 
he received his commission as an official of the assembly 
or as a citizen of Rhodiapolis, and we cannot determine 
whether he had any connection with the special court of 
the assembly*. One of the officials of the Lycian xowdv 
was called the recorder (vopoypadevs), and the title 
implies that laws were enacted by the assembly®. The 
xowov of Thessaly was asked by the governor to act as 
arbiter in a boundary dispute between Cierium and 
Metropolis ®, The decision was rendered by a secret vote— 
probably because of the necessity of preserving harmony 


* No. 114. Note that the ratification of this act by the provincial governor 
seems to be required. 


2 Kornemann, op. cit. 820 f. 

® Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 563, 680, 736, 739, chap. 12. These may refer to 
settlements of disputes between members of the concilium; cf. no. 46. 

4 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, chap. 12. 

> Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 680. 6 No. 46. 


Wee eX) 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


within the assembly. It would be interesting to know 
whether the cities concerned took part as advocates as well 
as judges. 

The growth of Christianity and the abolition of the 
imperial cult turned the provincial assemblies into purely 
secular organizations in the fourth century. Their prestige 
had already been lowered by the redistribution of the 
provinces of Diocletian, and the creation of diocesan 
assemblies must have affected the smaller provincial 
organizations materially. In the late empire our chief 
evidence for the history of the assemblies comes from the 
Theodosian Code. The rescripts which this Code contains, 
addressed directly to concilia, deal with points of law, the 
right of appeal, and the immunity of provincial priests 
and civic magistrates from certain liturgies. Other re- 
scripts addressed to provincials are usually interpreted as 
directed to the assemblies”. If this is the case, the concilia 
discussed taxation, the regulation of curiales, the public 
post, extortion by imperial officials, and similar matters. 
In all these cases the assembly had no powers beyond that 
of bringing the questions to the notice of the emperor in 
appeals or complaints against the injustice and corruption 
of imperial agents in the province. Various rescripts 
addressed by the emperor to the praetorian prefect safe- 
guard the right of assembly in ordinary and special 
meetings, as well as the freedom of discussion and appeal, 
In all of these there is an implication that these privileges 
were often disregarded, and that the provincial assembly, 
where it existed, was brought under the control of 
governors to serve their personal interests. Ammianus 
tells us that Iphicles brought to the praetorian prefect the 
honorary decree conferred upon the governor by the 
Epirotes. On seeing the emperor afterwards and being 
questioned as to the sincerity of this expression of praise, 
Iphicles replied that his fellow-citizens passed the decree 


1 Guiraud, op. cit. 228 ff. 2 Kornemann, op. cit. 825 ff. 
SiCGd. 1 hoi 2, 12..8 (355) 12.0302) 


LER 3a 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


with groans and in spite of themselves’. Some of the em- 
perors made an honest attempt to re-establish the councils 
on their former independent basis as a means of checking 
the corruption of provincial officials, but the forces of 
venality and extortion combined with bureaucracy to 
nullify their efforts. When the Justinian Code was com- 
piled, the assemblies had ceased to exist as a political force, 
and their organization survived only in the institutions of 
the Christian church. 

It has been said that the provincial assemblies con- 
tained the germ of representative government. It 1s true 
that they were representative, and elected organizations, 
but they never acquired any legislative, administrative, or 
judicial power, save in the rare cases when they acted on 
the direct authority of the emperor or governor in pro- 
mulgating their edicts or publishing their decisions. The 
assemblies commanded no armies, and had control of no 
revenues beyond the contributions made by the munici- 
palities for minor expenses and the funds from minor 
endowments. The money expended in the imperial 
worship and games was provided by the generosity of the 
officials appointed to the several liturgies. The primary 
function of the assemblies was religious, and through the 
grandeur of their display they undoubtedly acquired con- 
siderable prestige. In their secondary capacity as a board 
of review of the governor’s policies, they were, we believe, 
encouraged by the emperors who desired to keep a close 
check on provincial administration, especially in the 
senatorial provinces. Most of the accusations lodged 
against corrupt officials came from provinces governed by 
the senate, and it must have been especially galling for this 
body to try its own agents. When the provinces all came 
under imperial control, the activities of the assemblies 
ceased. At least the records of impeachments disappear. 
In the late empire the imperial government sought to 


1 Ammianus, 30. 5. 8. 


bbe) 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


revive this function of the assemblies, but we have already 
seen that the attempt failed. 

The assemblies were seriously handicapped by meeting, 
usually, but once a year, and with a membership which 
was constantly changing, no continuous political traditions 
could be established. The appointment of the curator as 
an imperial agent, and the closer supervision of municipal 
affairs by the governors were important elements in check- 
ing the development of the provincial organizations. 
Moreover, the ingrained individualism of ancient states 
persisted long after they became municipalities of the 
empire and prevented concerted action for a common 
cause. Most of these cities, through their inordinate 
vanity, preferred to bring their difficulties directly to 
Rome by means of expensive embassies which might 
commend them to imperial notice. As a result of this 
practice, bureaus were created to deal with all phases of 
municipal administration, and in the development of 
imperial bureaucracy we have perhaps the most potent 
factor in preventing the political growth of the concilia, 
for legislative, administrative, and judicial powers were 
gradually concentrated in the hands of the palace officials. 
For these reasons we believe that it is not altogether 
accidental that scarcely any records of the assemblies are 
preserved in the third century, and while the emperors 
sought to revive the assemblies in the fourth century in 
order to correct abuses in provincial government, they 
were powerless against the forces of the corrupt bureau- 
cracy. 

Although this sketch of the provincial assemblies in 
their relation to municipal institutions shows that the 
assemblies were relatively unimportant politically, we 
must not disregard them as wholly negligible. Itis possible 
that the Councils of the early Church based their organiza- 
tion on that of the provincial assemblies, for the bishops 
were virtually the delegates of their municipal dioceses, 
and although the Councils were not always provincial in 


[eae RS aa 


PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES 


scope, the representative principle may well have been 
borrowed from this pagan source. The modern parlia- 
ment also resembles the provincial assembly in form, but 
it would be unsafe to trace its development in a direct line 
through the medium of the Church Councils, although 
the latter may have transmitted the representative idea 
to the modern world. But the provincial assemblies served 
a more immediate purpose. They bound the whole empire 
together in a common cult, and, in the universal worship 
of Rome and the emperors, the subject states acknow- 
ledged the temporal and spiritual sovereignty of Rome. 
One may question whether the annual provincial rites, 
though celebrated with great pomp and splendor, were 
really as important, politically, as the local municipal 
cults, for only a small proportion of the population could 
attend the annual ceremonies. But the assemblies served 
their most useful purpose in safeguarding the interests 
of the municipalities against the excesses of imperial 
officials, and, in the common bond of mutual protection, 
they contributed in no slight measure to the breaking up 
of the old individualistic spirit, especially in the Greek 
states, and, by uniting all the municipalities in a province 
in a common interest, they gave birth to the spirit of 
nationalism; and though the importance of the assemblies 
had greatly diminished before the empire disintegrated, 
and though the separatist movement did not always follow 
the lines of the provincial organization, nevertheless the 
development of nationalism may be traced in no small 
measure to the influence of the provincial assemblies. 


[yai7.000) 


GHAP UE ROGET 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL 
FOLIC’ 


corporated the peoples of conquered territory in her 

own state or permitted them to unite with the 
various members of the Latin League!. The ancient con- 
ception of the city-state did not allow an unlimited 
extension of this policy, and the principle of founding 
Latin colonies was already formulated in 384 B.c. At the 
close of the war with the Latins in 338 B.c. Rome was 
for the first time faced with the problem of imperialism. 
_In dealing with her former allies she was fortunately 
guided by the statesmanship of wise and generous leaders, 
who repudiated the oriental idea that the sovereign state 
was entitled to be supported at the expense of the subject 
peoples. Some of the Latin states, hereafter to be known 
as municipia, were given full Roman citizenship, retaining 
their own territories and apparently also their own local 
governments. Others, the civitates sine suffragio, were not 
admitted to full citizenship, but enjoyed the privileges 
conferred thereby, except the right to vote or to hold 
office in Rome. These states, also, were left with complete 
jurisdiction over their local institutions. At the seaport 
of Antium a Roman colony was founded to which three 
hundred Roman citizens were assigned. The relation of 
the colonists to the native population is obscure, but 
ultimately the two groups were united politically and all 
enjoyed the privileges of Roman citizenship. Other 
Latin cities retained their former status and government, 
but as allied states (civitates foederatae) their treaties with 


Lex the middle of the fourth century Rome in- 


1 Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 21 ff. 
AMA egy al 12 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


Rome either tacitly or explicitly recognized her supremacy?. 
The Latin colonies, whether founded before or after 338, 
were bound to Rome in the same relationship which they 
had formerly had with the Latin League. In all cases 
Rome controlled their foreign relations, and in the event 
of war military contingents had to be furnished by every 
member of the federation to defend the common cause. 
By this system of graduated relationship and by binding 
the various states of Latium to herself individually, Rome 
was able to maintain her supremacy in the federation 
without difficulty and, as a result of her fair treatment, 
the various members remained uniformly loyal, and many 
non-Latin cities voluntarily sought treaties of alliance 
with the state whose power was so rapidly expanding on 
the banks of the Tiber. 

The treatment of her Latin allies presents in miniature 
Rome’s policy towards the Italian cities and tribes in 
extending her dominion over the peninsula. Roman and 
Latin colonies were planted throughout Italy. By friendly 
negotiations or by war Rome brought every tribe and state 
from the Apennines to the Sicilian Straits within the sphere 
of her influence, and by the beginning of the first Punic 
war Italy formed a federation, under the hegemony of 
Rome, which was composed of Roman and Latin colonies, 
muntcipia, civitates sine suffragio, and civitates foederatae. 
We hear also of organizations, such as praefecturae, fora, 
and conciliabula, whose status was beneath that of the more 
fully developed civic communities. For the most part 
people living under the tribal form of government were 
encouraged to settle in municipalities, since the Roman 
senate preferred to deal with a more stable form of govern- 
ment than was usually found amongst the primitive 
mountain tribes of Italy. The policy of differentiating the 
status of the various members of the federation was prob- 
ably devised as a means of rewarding or punishing those 

1 Reid, Municipalities of the Roman Empire, 51 ff.; Frank, Roman Im- 
perialism, 33 ff. 


Citzon 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


communities which had entered the federation willingly 
or by compulsion, but it also served to prevent disloyal 
combinations amongst the various states against the supre- 
macy of Rome. 

Rome continued her policy of liberalism towards the 
members of her Italian federation until the close of the 
third century. The right of Roman citizenship was gene- 
rously granted to the more favored communities. Common 
service in the army spread the knowledge of the Roman 
language and institutions over Italy, and the colonial 
foundations helped the prefects and praetors in intro- 
ducing the principles of Roman law throughout the 
peninsula. 

The second Punic war marks a turning-point in the 
policy of Rome towards the federation. This was due in 
part to the disintegration of political ideals as a result of 
the exhausting struggle, and partly to the influence of 
imperialistic principles acquired from her experiences in 
provincial government. Members of the federation who 
had joined Hannibal were punished with the utmost 
severity. In the century following the close of the war 
Rome began to regard the federated states as subjects. 
Roman citizenship was seldom granted to the Latin or 
Italian cities, and the Latins were no longer invited to 
share in the colonial foundations of Rome. In many 
ways the rights of the allies were violated. Fields which 
had been laid waste or abandoned during the war with 
Hannibal were apparently regarded as ager publicus of 
Rome, and the allies were deprived of their jurisdiction 
over.them. In 193 the courts were authorized to apply 
only Roman law to cases of usury!. In the Bacchanalian 
conspiracy (186 B.c.) the senate assumed criminal juris- 
diction over Romans, Latins, and allies, condemning all 
classes with fine impartiality*. Other infringements of 
local rights by Roman magistrates were cited by Gracchus 
in pleading the cause of the Italians. On the other hand, 


AD Livy) 3 5. %s 2 Livy, 39. 14. Cf. Bruns, 36. 
[ 179 ] 12-2 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


Roman law was being adopted more and more throughout 
Italy, and many cities had the privilege of incorporating in 
their statutes the laws of the Roman senate or assemblies. 
Rome does not appear to have exerted any influence on the 
constitutional forms of the allied states, but allowed them 
to preserve their traditional institutions unchanged. It 
is possible that Roman commissioners or officials devised 
charters for some of the cities, but in most cases the 
changes were made at the request of the municipality 
itself and were not imposed by Rome. A case in point is 
the charter devised for Puteoli by Sulla. When colonies 
were founded, a commission was appointed to draw up 
their laws. These charters were not necessarily uniform, 
and doubtless varied in different localities and in different 
periods, but, in general, the commissioners must have 
followed the models framed by their predecessors. 

The Social war brought the gift of Roman citizenship 
to all Italians, but it is probable that no immediate changes 
were made in the forms of municipal government, since 
the troubled times which followed were not suitable for 
the settlement of constitutional problems. During the 
revolutionary period the Italian cities suffered from the 
tyrannical acts of both senatorial and popular factions. 
Sulla and his successors freely confiscated the territory of 
cities unfriendly to their cause, and colonies of veterans 
were often settled on these lands, where they enjoyed a 
quasi-municipal organization of their own, independent 
of the local government. Such a situation was intolerable, 
and could only be remedied by the fusion of the two classes 
of citizens. In the cities where the two groups combined, 
some changes would have to be made in constitutional 
forms. Probably the /ex Iulia municipalis was devised to 
bring some uniformity out of the chaos which had deve- 
loped in Italy when Italian towns were transformed into 
Roman municipalities, and in the confusion incident to 
the civil wars. The Julian law marks the first attempt at 
uniformity in civic government. The law, however, was 


[ 180 ] 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


limited in scope, and affected only certain details of ad- 
ministration, such as the election and qualifications of 
officials and decurions and the administration of law. In 
other respects the municipalities preserved their tradi- 
tional forms and customs, although it is probable that the 
tendency to ape Roman institutions had long been active}, 
and that, in the course of time, the cities conformed more 
and more to a uniform pattern. 

Rome acquired her first province at the close of the 
first Punic war, and in Sicily she came into contact with 
the oriental conception of imperialism, according to 
which the conquered races paid tribute to the conqueror. 
Three cities in Sicily were admitted as allies of Rome 
and five were given the status of civitates liberae. The 
latter were regarded as independent communities, but 
their right to conduct negotiations with other states was 
circumscribed, and in actual practice they probably 
differed but little from the federated states of Italy. The 
territory of certain cities which had shown bitter hostility 
to Rome was confiscated and became ager publicus of 
Rome. These cities were called civitates censoriae, because 
the leasing of their land was under the control of the Roman 
censor. The remainder of Sicily was divided among the 
civitates stipendiariae, which paid an annual tithe of their 
produce to the sovereign state”. In organizing the pro- 
vince a commission was sent out to draw up a /ex pro- 
vinciae, which determined the rights and privileges of the 
various cities in the district. It is uncertain how far the 
constitutions of the various cities were modified by this 
law, but it is probable that traditional forms were pre- 
served as far as possible, while the control of the municipal 
government was placed in the hands of an oligarchy 
friendly to the conquerors. No attempt was made to 


1 For the municipia fundana which had the right in republican times to 
copy Roman statutes, cf. Elmore, T'rams. Am. Phil. Assoc. 47 (1916), 35 ff. 

2 Cf. pp. 47/7. On the various theories concerning the /ex Iulia, cf. 
no. 24. 


Sie 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


provide uniform charters for the provincial cities, although 
the system of collecting the tribute and of administering 
the law may have tended to standardize the legal and 
financial administration in the towns within the bounds 
of each province. 

In adding new provinces to their dominion the Romans 
were guided in some measure by the results of their ex- 
perience in dealing with older acquisitions. In general the 
principle of exacting tribute was followed. We also find 
that some cities were given more liberal privileges than 
others, probably with the idea of lessening the danger of 
disloyal combinations in alien lands. In Africa and in the 
eastern provinces which were thoroughly Hellenized, the 
Romans found the municipal system generally established, 
and no changes were made in it, except to modify the 
government of the more democratic cities by strengthen- 
ing the oligarchy. It is probable that most of the Greek 
cities had already become timocratic under the rule of the 
Macedonian and Seleucid princest. Wherever the civic 
commonwealths had not fully developed, the Romans set 
themselves the task of organizing them as soon as possible. 
New cities were founded or the territory of older ones was 
extended. In some cases the serritorium assigned to cities 
was very extensive, and as the villages developed in im- 
portance, new cities were created within the territory of 
the old. No uniform laws were prescribed for the new 
foundations so far as we can discover, although Bithynian 
cities were given senates formed on western models, and 
the charters of other cities, established by later governors, 
probably followed similar lines. Great flexibility was per- 
mitted, since the political development of the inhabitants 
and other local conditions were undoubtedly taken into 
account. : 

While little effort was made to secure uniformity in 
municipal government, the legislation of the Gracchi took 
an important, if ill-advised, step in this direction when 

1 Cf. no. 9; Colin, Rome et la Gréce, 651 ff. 


[real 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


provision was made that the contracts for the collection 
of the tribute from Asia should be let in the city of Rome. 
By this law tax-gathering became the special prerogative 
of the eguites. They and their agents were absolutely 
unscrupulous in carrying out their contracts. In raising 
the quota from each city they held the magistrates and 
senators responsible for all deficiencies, as well as for loans 
contracted by the city to meet the obligations to the state. 
This is well illustrated by the story of the agents of Brutus, 
who enforced the payment of a loan by shutting up the 
senators of Cypriote Salamis in the town hall until some 
of them perished from starvation!. The theory of collective 
liability was probably borrowed from the practice of the 
old Hellenistic bureaucracy, or it may have developed 
from the Sicilian custom, where the municipalities often 
availed themselves of the privilege of farming their own 
quota of taxes in order to save collectors’ profits. The 
Gracchan legislation applied, in the first instance, to Asia, 
but the system was soon extended to other provinces. 
Under these conditions cities suffering from the burden 
of taxation would insensibly abandon their more demo- 
cratic institutions by choosing their official class from the 
wealthier members of the community—a tendency which 
was, no doubt, fostered by the Romans, whose chief in- 
terest was the collection of revenue. 

In the administration of law the rights of individual 
cities were usually defined by the /ex provinciae. ‘The cities 
were usually permitted to use their own laws, at all events 
in certain cases, and the republican senate brought no 
pressure upon them to adopt the laws of Rome. The 
governor, however, had large judicial powers, and in 
issuing his edict he not only followed the provisions of the 
lex provinciae, but also copied extensively from the 
praetor’s edict”. In his circuit, therefore, the principles 
of Roman law were made familiar to the various cities, 
and just as their law influenced the development of Roman 

1 Cicero, ad Att. 6. 2. * Cicero, ad fam. 3.8.4; ad Att. 6.1.15. 


[ 783) 9 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


jurisprudence, so it is probable that many cities, in turn, 
adopted the better features of Roman law’. \ 

The colonial policy of the Romans was at first dictated 
by military requirements, although it served the secondary 
purpose of providing lands for the indigent populace. 
Colonial foundations of the Latin type ceased after 
181 B.c., and Rome thereafter shared none of the privi- 
leges of the new settlements with her Latin allies. In 
172 B.c., however, Carteia in Spain was given Latin rights 
by the comitia. An important precedent was thus estab- 
lished by which the provincial lands could be recognized 
as Italian soil. The foundation of transmarine colonies was 
not popular at Rome, and Gracchus met with bitter 
opposition when he attempted to carry his proposal to 
found a Roman colony on the site of Carthage. After his 
death the portion of the Rubrian law providing for the 
settlement of Carthage was repealed. The motives which 
led the senate to reverse its policy by the foundation of 
Narbo Martius in 118 B.c. cannot be determined. There- 
after the senatorial party was opposed to colonial founda- 
tions beyond the bounds of Italy and bitterly fought the 
proposals of those democrats who sought to establish 
colonies in various provinces, and who succeeded in con- 
ferring Latin rights on the trans-Padane cities of Northern 
Italy. Marius initiated the policy of settling his soldiers 
in colonies of veterans, and later military leaders followed 
his example. Sulla and Caesar established their veterans, 
for the most part, on Italian farms confiscated from those 
opposed to them in the wars. Augustus and later emperors 
purchased lands for the purpose. 

Caesar was the first Roman statesman to comprehend 
fully the fact that the safety of Rome as the capital of the 
empire could be secured only by fair and equitable 
government of the provinces, which now constituted the 
real source of imperial revenue and power. He and his 


1 Mommsen, Rémisches Strafrecht, 113 ff. 
2 Abbott, Class. Phil. 10 (1915), 365 ff. 


[ 184 ] 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


successors devoted their best efforts to administrative 
problems, and they eliminated most of the abuses which 
had grown up during republican times. The equestrian 
order was deprived of its privilege of farming the pro- 
vincial taxes, and in placing the collection of the imperial 
revenues as a charge upon the municipalities themselves, 
the emperors returned to a policy of decentralization. The 
convenience of this system led to important results in the 
extension of the municipal organization. Where a district 
was not sufficiently advanced for self-governing municipal 
institutions, various devices were adopted. For example, 
client princes were placed over certain kingdoms in Asia; 
Egypt was governed through a prefect; Cappadocia was 
divided into orparnytar; in Thrace we find toparchies; 
and in Illyria regiones were established. In all parts of the 
empire, however, the rulers fostered the development of 
municipal life, and by the beginning of the fourth century 
the whole empire might be considered as a group of 
administrative units made up of municipalities and im- 
perial estates. Caesar also set an imperial precedent for 
the practice of regarding the provinces as Roman soil by 
founding transmarine colonies of Roman citizens, and he 
thus prepared the way for the grant of citizenship to 
provincial cities. The /ex Iulia municipalis played an im- 
portant réle in developing the idea that municipal institu- 
tions in a particular district or province should be regulated 
by uniform laws; the reorganization of Gaul by Augustus, 
and of Spain by Vespasian was undoubtedly governed by 
this principle. 

In the first century of the empire the municipalities 
were left with a great amount of freedom and independ- 
ence. Universal peace brought general prosperity. The 
borders of the empire were for the most part undisturbed, 
and there were no costly wars to lay any undue burden 


1 For the organization of the provinces, cf. Marquardt, op. cit. 1, 241 ff; 
Kuhn, Die stadt. u. birger!. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2, 41 ff.; Mommsen, 
Roman Provinces, passim. 


[ 185 ] 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


upon the imperial treasury. Until the principate was 
secure, provincial governors were under close scrutiny, 
since the danger to the succession lay in that quarter. As 
a result there was a tendency to encourage the independ- 
ence of the municipalities in their relations to the governor. 
This may be seen in the revival and extension of the pro- 
vincial assemblies which served as an important check on 
the governors, especially in the senatorial provinces, and 
in the encouragement afforded to embassies which came 
from the provincial cities direct to Rome. The emperor 
was universally regarded as the great benefactor who had 
released the provinces from the iniquities of senatorial 
government and from the miseries which had befallen 
them in the last century of the republic. The worship of 
the imperial godhead, established in every province and 
in every city, was not inspired by senseless flattery, but 
by areal sense of obligation. To the emperor, accordingly, 
the cities were eager to appeal on every conceivable 
question which affected their interests, although many 
embassies, from a desire to bring themselves to the im- 
perial notice, were inspired by motives of vanity. It was 
inevitable that bureaus should be created to handle the great 
variety of business which was referred to Rome. Thus the 
paternal benevolence of the central administration and the 
servility of the local oligarchies reacted constantly on each 
other, until the central bureaus absorbed local legislative 
and administrative functions, while the municipal govern- 
ments gradually lost their political initiative and power. 
Under the imperial administration the decline of 
democracy in the provincial cities continued. In the West 
the popular assembly had never been important. The 
people expressed their will largely through their power 
of election, and this privilege seems to have been trans- 
ferred to the senate before the beginning of the third 
century except in the case of a few cities in Africal. The 
local senate was the chief organ of administration; and 
1 Cod. Th. 12. 5. 1 (326). 


[ 186 ] 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


since its members held office for life, they controlled the 
annual magistrates as thoroughly as the Roman senate 
had once controlled the consuls. In the East democratic 
forms were cherished as a heritage of the past, but it is 
doubtful if the popular assemblies had exerted any real 
influence on the local administration even during the last 
century of the republic!. The loss of political instincts in 
the mass of the population was fatal to the best interests 
of municipal government. During the first century of the 
Christian era the administration came more and more 
under the control of vested interests which were no longer 
held in restraint by the scrutiny of a popular assembly. 
In spite of the outward brilliance of municipal life at this 
period and the intense rivalry of cities in building public 
works and in celebrating magnificent games and spec- 
tacles, it is undoubtedly true that corruption and mis- 
government flourished. The eagerness with which wealthy 
citizens sought high office and undertook expensive 
liturgies was not always due to patriotic motives and to 
civic pride, but was more often inspired by a desire to 
enrich themselves at the expense of the municipality. 
Cicero had observed this tendency in Cilicia?, and Ger- 
manicus was called upon to correct the abuses of local 
magistrates in the East®. Tacitus records the incident of 
Atilius of Fidena, who gave a gladiatorial show from 
motives of sordid gain, when, by the collapse of the flimsy 
stands which he erected, fifty thousand people were 
killed or injured4. Had we the full records of municipal 
history from the standpoint of the common people, we 
should undoubtedly find that many a record of brilliant 
service carved on enduring marble was amply repaid by 
the emoluments of office. Proof of this statement is not 
absolutely lacking, for the appointment of imperial agents 


1 Cf. pp. 69 f. The Athenian assembly exercised important powers in 
the reign of Hadrian; cf. no. go, Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 205 ff. 

2 Cicero, ad Ait. 5. 16. 62. Si Pan 4anh2.. 64, 

4 Vac. dan. 4. 62. 


(PRS Za) 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


and commissioners was not unknown in the first century; 
moreover, early in the second century, the curator ret 
publicae was created as a regular official for managing 
those communities whose internal affairs had become 
so entangled that the local authorities were incapable of 
solving their problems’. 

In the first two centuries of the Christian era the great 
achievement of the empire was the Romanization of the 
West. The early emperors may have dreamed of accom- 
plishing the same task in the East, but the forces of Greek 
tradition were too strong to be successfully overcome. 
The extension of the municipal system in the western 
provinces was an important factor in this movement, and, 
as the native population was for the most part unhampered 
by any cultural traditions, greater uniformity was attain- 
able in the West than was possible in those provinces 
where Rome came into contact with older civilizations. 
For the empire as a whole uniformity was impossible; the 
effective obstacles were the fundamental differences be- 
tween East and West, the division of administration 
between the senate and the emperor, and the inequalities 
of status in the various provincial cities, which continued 
from republican to imperial times. While few new colonies 
were founded after the age of Hadrian, the honorary title 
colonia was often conferred upon older cities, although the 
honor did not, necessarily, involve any change in con- 
stitutional forms®, Roman citizenship, however, was con- 
ferred with great liberality upon individuals and entire 
communities. Similarly, the ius Italicum and ius Latii 
were freely granted to provincial cities*. Since provinces 
were composed of federated, free, and stipendiary com- 
munities, and of Roman, Latin, and provincial citizens, 
uniformity in legislation was difficult. However, the 
knowledge and use of Roman law, as it was extended over 
the Roman world, carried the idea of universal legislation. 

1 Cf. pp. 90 ff; no. 65 a. a_Gy. pps Zt 


3 RE. s.v. ius Italicum, ius Latii. 


Wo 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


The regulations in regard to the fiscus and the imperial 
liturgies were undoubtedly universal in their application. 
In the course of time it is probable that the imperial 
regulations were adopted by the municipalities to apply 
to purely local liturgies. Furthermore, the imperial will 
was supreme in every province, and while it is evident 
that the earlier emperors legislated for each city indivi- 
dually, yet it is probable that the tendency to frame 
universal regulations for all parts of the empire steadily 
developed. An edict of Augustus, lowering the age limit 
of municipal magistrates, and one of Trajan, forbidding 
the formation of clubs, were effective in the senatorial 
province of Bithynia!. Finally, the development of bureau- 
cracy implies that the details of administration passed 
more and more into the hands of the civil service, and it 
was inevitable that uniform laws should become the 
prevailing practice in these departments. 

The appointment of the curator rei publicae, to whose 
office we have already referred, shows the trend of pater- 
nalistic legislation under Trajan*. The evidence implies 
that the office soon became widespread, and if this was the 
case, inefficiency and corruption in the local municipal 
administration must have been general. As the personal 
representative of the emperor, the curator played an im- 
portant part in undermining the power of the local 
authorities, and in later times he seems to have supplanted 
them in many cities. The office became so important that 
Ulpian devoted a special treatise to its duties. The corre- 
spondence between Trajan and Pliny shows the attitude 
of a benevolent and painstakingly conscientious emperor, 
and reveals the unhappy state into which the cities of 
Bithynia had fallen, when, for example, one of them could 
not decide on its own initiative whether a sewer should be 
covered. Hadrian devoted particular attention to the 
problems of municipal government in his travels. He 
also reorganized the civil service and placed it upon a more 


1 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 34, 79, 92, 93, 963 cf. 65. 2 Cf. pp. 90 ff- 
[ 189 ] 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


efficient basis. To him, also, is probably to be ascribed 
the codification of the provincial edict. By this act the 
administration of justice by the governor was placed on 
a uniform basis in the provincial courts. 

During the first two centuries of the Christian era the 
imperial policy in respect to municipal government, in so 
far as a policy can be discovered, was consistent and 
uniform. In the third century the attitude of the central 
government towards the provinces changed. The new 
policy was due, in part, to the character of the govern- 
ment. The senate was now reduced to a very minor part 
in the administration, and all the provinces were under 
the control of the emperor. The army was all-powerful. 
The emperors, who were usually chosen by it, were not 
selected from the Roman nobility, but were successful 
or popular military leaders, unfamiliar with Roman 
traditions and unacquainted with the problems of civil 
administration. The government thus became a military 
autocracy, whose chief concern was the collection of 
sufficient revenue to secure the loyalty of the legions, and 
this consideration determined its attitude in framing the 
imperial policy towards the municipalities in the third 
century and the later empire. 

Professor Rostovtseff has recently advocated the theory 
that the imperial policy of the third century was dictated 
by the hostility which existed between the army and the 
citiest. He believes that, since the legions were made up 
of conscripts drawn from the villages, where they had 
been exploited by the civic authorities, the peasant soldiers 
forced the emperors, chosen by them, to avenge past in- 
juries by oppressing the cities. The military autocracy 
sought to bring about a levelling, politically, socially, and 
economically, of the wealthy governing class in the cities. 
Rostovtseff believes, somewhat inconsistently, that the 
emperors sought to strengthen the municipalities by 


t Rostovtseff (formerly Rostowzew), Mus. Belge, 27 (1923), 233.7. Gf. 
Nos. 139, 192. 


[ 190 ] 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


creating a strong peasantry. Here, however, they only 
succeeded in intensifying the antagonism between town 
and country. The peasant began to be conscious of his 
power and looked to the emperor as his protector against 
the city. We have discussed this theory more fully else- 
wheret. The chief objection to it is the fact that the 
majority of the complaints lodged by the villagers in the 
third century are directed against the soldiers and imperial 
officials who were supposed to protect them. 

Early in the third century the edict of Caracalla, ex- 
tending the Roman franchise to all provincials, is one of 
the most important acts of the imperial government in the 
history of Roman municipal legislation. The motive of 
the emperor in issuing this edict has been variously inter- 
preted. Cassius Dio, the only ancient historian who refers 
to it, states that the purpose was to collect more revenue ?, 
This might have been done, however, by extending the 
inheritance tax, hitherto levied only on Romans, to all 
provincials*. Rostovtseff advances the theory that Cara- 
calla, being of non-Roman origin, took delight in reducing 
the Romans to the same level as the provincials*. From 
the standpoint of municipal history, we believe that the 
edict served a different purpose, and we venture the 
following interpretation. Heavy taxation and burdensome 
liturgies had already begun to press with great severity 
on the governing bodies of the municipalities, especially 
since the resources of the empire were dwindling and the 
cost of administration and defense was increasing. The 
necessary revenue could not be raised unless the municipal 
organization continued unimpaired. But, as we have 
pointed out in our discussion of liturgies, it was more and 
more difficult to find suitable candidates for public office®. 
Before adopting compulsory legislation, the government 
had resorted to various devices in order to secure eligible 
candidates for the local senate and magistracies, chief of 

eR O2.40; 2 Cf. n0.\392. 8 Hirschfeld, 97. 
PACH ELOO NI Lal ee Cie Dp tt aie 


[toa 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


which was the grant of Latium maius or minus, whereby 
members of the curia or magistrates, respectively, earned 
the right of Roman citizenship. For a time this legislation 
may have succeeded in inducing candidates to stand for 
office, but ultimately it defeated its purpose, since no one 
who became a Roman citizen could be required to hold 
office or to perform liturgies in any other city unless he 
chose to do so voluntarilyt. Since those chosen for this 
honor were usually the wealthier citizens, and since the 
number of Romans steadily increased in each community, 
the local government became proportionately weaker. It 
is probable, therefore, that the edict of Caracalla was de- 
vised as a means of reviving the municipal administration 
in non-Roman communities. The conventus civium 
Romanorum disappeared, and all members of the com- 
munity were placed upon the same footing in regard to 
municipal obligations. In this way the collection of the 
imperial revenues was better secured. Furthermore, the 
edict must have swept away the inequalities in the status 
of provincial cities. It has been noted that the title civitas 
began to supplant municipium and colonia about this time, 
and the distinction between free, federated, and tributary 
states must have been largely eliminated, although it is 
probable that the privileges of some cities were renewed or 
confirmed by special grant. For example, the ius [talicum 
was cherished by a few cities until later times, and Antino- 
opolis in Egypt seems to have retained the privileges 
granted by Hadrian as late as the end of the third century?. 
Unfortunately, the amelioration of conditions in the cities, 
which was accomplished by the edict, was more than 
nullified by the famines, plagues, civil wars, and the com- 
plete demoralization of economic life in the century which 
followed. Moreover, the wealthier class was still able to 
secure exemption from municipal obligations by obtaining 
the rank of imperial senator. 
TG OaT3, 1.7) 
2 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 397; cf. nos. 137, 170, 183, 184. 


[ 192 ] 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


The social effects of the edict may be seen more clearly 
in the oriental cities. Here the administration had been 
controlled by a Greco-Roman oligarchy which was very 
much in the minority. When all citizens obtained Roman 
rights, the ruling aristocracy was submerged in a rising 
tide of orientalism, and as the central government became 
weaker, the spirit of nationalism began to manifest itself 
in various provinces. Native law, however, was supplanted 
by Roman jurisprudence much more rapidly under the 
new conditions, and it is probable that the municipal 
courts declined rapidly in the following century. More- 
over, since the status of all cities was now the same, and 
since the military emperors cared little for local traditions, 
a policy of uniform legislation for the whole empire 
developed more rapidly. It must not be understood from 
this that the internal constitutions of all cities were brought 
into conformity. The imperial government cared little 
for such details so long as tribute continued to be paid. 
There is, however, some evidence that local charters were 
overridden, as for example, in the law which required 
that magistrates should be elected from among the de- 
curions!. Ulpian defined the duties of the curator rei 
publicae in a special treatise, and Arcadius Charisius wrote 
a book on municipal munera. The Digest contains 
numerous extracts from the jurists dealing with municipal 
administration. Paulus, Ulpian, Hermogenianus, and 
others dealt with the office of governor, and his relations 
with the municipalities were closely defined. The power 
of veto, the right of making nominations for magistracies 
and liturgies, the oversight of public works, the formation 
of the a/bum, the administration of justice, the enforce- 
ment of laws regarding honors and liturgies, and other 
details of municipal administration were vested in the 
governor or curator. 

1 The laws in regard to the privileges, responsibilities and status of de- 


curions seem to have been enacted before the time of Ulpian. Cf Dig. 
50. 2 passim. 


AMA [ 193 ] 13 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


The preservation of the municipality as a medium for 
the collection of revenues offers the best explanation of the 
imperial policy of the third century. This was undoubtedly 
the reason why Severus extended the municipal system 
to Egypt in a.p. 202. The formation of local guilds of 
workmen in various trades was also dictated by a desire 
to create a new class that would be responsible for a portion 
of the liturgies which were pressing so heavily upon the 
municipalities. We cannot determine at what period the 
principle of origo was extended from the Orient to other 
parts of the empire. The emperors early recognized that 
a citizen’s birthplace had priority in claiming his services 
for magistracies and liturgiest. According to a law 
recorded by Ulpian, the provincial governor had the 
power to compel decurions, who had left their native city, 
to return and fulfil their obligations in the curia*. This is 
the beginning of a long line of legislation dealing with the 
curiales, the purport of which was to bind them to their 
birthplace and to reduce them to virtual serfdom. This 
development was slow, but it was accelerated by the legis- 
lation of Diocletian, who by separating the civil and 
military power in the provincial administration and by his 
subdivision of the empire and the provinces greatly in- 
creased the cost of administration. To meet the additional 
outlay a new system of taxation was devised which not 
only placed a heavier burden upon the subject peoples, 
but also forced them to exploit their lands to the point of 
exhaustion. 

The imperial policies of the fourth and fifth centuries 
do not differ from those of the third, except that the em- 
perors resorted to more desperate expedients in order to 
preserve the civic organization. The curiales and members 
of guilds were bound to their order and their place of 

1 This principle seems to be indicated in the /ex provinciae of Bithynia 
when Pompey forbade the cities to grant rights of citizenship to anyone who 
was already citizen of another town within the bounds of the province, 


Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 114. SUIE SOL 2.1 
[ 194 ] 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


origin, and all citizens transmitted their rank and their 
profession in hereditary succession to their descendants. 
The misery of the civilian population was aggravated by 
the oppression of the bureaucracy, whose members ex- 
ploited the provincials in every conceivable way. The last 
great act of imperial charity was the creation of the office 
of defensor plebis, whose duty it was to protect the common 
people and to safeguard their interests. How far he 
succeeded it is impossible to say. In the later empire he 
seems to have joined with the wealthy proprietors in their 
work of spoliation. He also contributed to the weakening 
of the powers of the local municipal magistrates, especially 
in legal and in administrative functions}. 

We have traced elsewhere the results of Rome’s failure 
to develop a sound social, political, and economic policy 
in municipal administration®. Her statesmen were usually 
opportunists, and few clearly defined policies which were 
steadily or consciously pursued can be discovered. The 
greatest achievement of Rome was the extension of the 
municipal system over the greater part of her empire, 
thereby preparing the way for the more rapid infiltration 
of the cultural ideas of the age. One of the gravest defects 
in her policy was the preservation of the particularism of 
the ancient city-state. Had the provincial councils been 
allowed to develop, they might have created an organiza- 
tion along modern lines where there would have been 
cooperation for the common good, and where a national 
consciousness might have arisen which would have united 
and strengthened the empire. As it was, each city was 
encouraged to preserve its individuality as an isolated unit. 
More fatal still was the elimination of the democracy as 
a factor in local government. Thus the mass of the people 
was deprived of the power of exercising its political 
instincts. An irresponsible oligarchy gained control of 
the municipal administration, and the way was opened for 
widespread corruption and inefhciency. Finally the central 


1 Cf. pp. 92f. 2 Cf. pp. 197 ff. 
[ 195 ] 13-2 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY 


government was compelled to come to the rescue, but the 
statesmen of that age could discover no other remedy for 
the situation than by the creation of new bureaus and by 
the multiplication of officials. When the imperial power 
became a military autocracy, the city was regarded chiefly 
as a convenient agent for the collection of taxes to support 
the army and the bureaucracy, and thereafter the preserva- 
tion of this instrument was the motive of all legislation 
dealing with municipal institutions, 


[ 196 ] 


CHAP DE Rv xy 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


ode SA HE world,’ wrote Tertullian1, “‘is every day 

better known, better cultivated, and more civilized 

than before. Everywhere roads are traced, every 
district is known, every country opened to commerce. 
Smiling fields have invaded the forests; flocks and herds 
have routed the wild beasts; the very sands are sown; the 
rocks are broken up; the marshes drained. There are now 
as many cities as there were formerly cottages. Reefs and 
shoals have lost their terrors. Wherever there is a trace 
of life there are houses, human habitations, and well 
ordered governments.” While the rhetorical exaggeration 
of this panegyric of the Roman world under Aurelius may 
be readily discounted, and exceptions to the general 
happiness and content may be granted, the prosperity of 
the empire in the first and second centuries of its history 
is everywhere apparent. In the long era of peace trade 
and commerce developed unhindered, and agricultural 
or industrial communities were free from the wastage of 
foreign wars and internal strife. Municipal institutions 
spread far and wide until the empire became in great part 
an aggregate of city-states. In each of these the citizens 
displayed an intense pride in public welfare, and endowed 
their native town with splendid monuments, buildings, 
and gifts for special purposes, such as libraries and 
schools. Offices and honors were eagerly sought, and 
lavish contributions were made in attaining them. Public 
spirited citizens, civic pride, and keen urban rivalries 
combined to produce a brilliant municipal life throughout 
the empire. 

1 Tertullian, de anima, 30 (Ferrero’s translation). 


[ 197 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


In bitter contrast to the prosperity of the early days of 
the empire, the records of the fourth century present a far 
different picture. The citizens now sought every possible 
means of avoiding public service. Oppressed by heavy 
burdens of taxation and liturgies, they often preferred to 
abandon their property and take refuge in flight rather 
than discharge their obligations. Local senates no longer 
had members sufficient in numbers to preserve the muni- 
cipal organization, and many cities had degenerated into 
villages, or had been completely abandoned. ‘The law codes 
are filled with references to deserted curiae and fugitive 
citizens!. Desperate remedies were applied to restore civic 
life, but so severe was their nature that the process of 
decline was aggravated. It is everywhere apparent that 
the ancient city-state had become bankrupt in its social, 
political, and economic life, and had passed into the hands 
of an imperial receivership administered by an autocratic 
bureaucracy. 

The problem of the decay of municipal institutions has 
not received the same attention as the decline of the 
empire, but the factors which determined the fate of each 
were essentially the same, for the vitality of a nation 
depends on the strength of its component parts. Many 
theories have been set forth to account for the disintegra- 
tion of Roman power, of which none can be accepted as 
the sole explanation”. Many factors played a part, and the 
most difficult problem, after the lapse of centuries, is to 
determine their relative importance. In some cases purely 
local conditions, such as the shifting of trade-routes, or 


* Cod. Th. 12. 1. 6 (319), 11 (325), 13 (326), 22 (336), 24 (338), 25 
(338), 40 (353), 43 (355), 49 (361), 63 (370), et alia. 

* There is a good summary and critique of theories advanced by earlier 
scholars in 4m. Hist. Rev. 20 (1915), 724.7. Cf. Declareuil, Quelgues 
problémes a’ histoire des institutions municipales au temps de l’ Empire romain; 
Hadley, Rome and the World Today; Heitland, The Roman Fate; Ferrero, 
The Ruin of Ancient Civilization; Seeck, Geschichte des Untergangs der 
antiken Welt; Simkhovitch, ‘‘Rome’s Fall Reconsidered,” one of the essays 
in Towards a Better Understanding of Fesus; Heitland, Iterum. 


[ 198 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


the exhaustion of mines, clay deposits, or forests, affected 
the prosperity of communities depending upon them. It 
is our purpose, however, to outline briefly the history 
of the political, social, and economic developments in 
municipal life under the empire, and to determine if 
possible what factors were universally operative in reducing 
municipal institutions to their unhappy plight in the 
fourth century. 

The most important problem of statecraft in the Roman 
Empire was the adjustment of the political relations be- 
tween the central government and the municipalities. The 
civic organization had been retained wherever the Romans 
found it existing, as a convenient unit of administration; 
and where the native population lived under a more 
primitive social organization, municipal government was 
introduced as soon as it was found practicable to do so. 
The cities already established in conquered territory were 
deprived of their military authority, and usually lost, or 
were seriously limited in, the power of conducting negotia- 
tions with other states. The privilege of using their own 
laws in their courts was highly prized by them, and the 
right was sometimes accorded, but in most cases the law 
was administered by the governor in accordance with the 
provisions of his own edict. The Romans seldom con- 
cerned themselves with constitutional changes in subject 
cities, but since they preferred to deal with a stable 
oligarchy rather than with a fickle democracy, the popular 
assemblies gradually ceased to exercise any power, and 
the senate became the chief organ of municipal govern- 
ment®. Theoretically, each municipality was responsible for 
the administration of its own territory, but governors 
often found excuses, legitimate or otherwise, for inter- 
ference. The system of farming out the collection of 
taxes to publicani was especially fruitful in involving the 
cities in financial troubles; and in the regulation of these 
and other matters the decision of the governor was final. 


* Cf. pp. 487. > Cf. pp. 186 ff. 
[ 199 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


With the establishment of the empire the position of 
the subject races improved immeasurably. The paternal- 
istic administration relieved the provincials from the 
countless exactions of the old régime, and the emperor was 
always willing to hear complaints and to remedy them. It 
is little wonder that the cities regarded the head of the 
state as an all-wise, all-powerful, and beneficent prince, 
and we may well believe that their decrees of adulation 
were thoroughly sincere. Partly from gratitude, partly 
from servility, they constantly referred their difficulties 
to the emperor, and the roads to Rome were thronged 
with embassies from senatorial and imperial provinces 
alike. This practice led to the creation of bureaucratic 
offices which, once inaugurated, tended to perpetuate 
themselves. Since a great number of problems were 
decided by the central administration, precedents and rules 
of procedure were established which were ultimately in- 
corporated in laws and applied to the whole empire 
without regard to local charters or privileges. The bureaus 
thus played an extremely important part in transferring the 
legislative functions of the municipal governments to 
Rome, and in clearly defining the relations of the pro- 
vincial governors to the cities by formulating universal 
laws in regard to the magistracies, the curator, the defensor, 
the decurions, the liturgies, and other details of civic life?. 

While the legislative functions of municipal govern- 
ments had largely passed into the hands of the central 
authorities by the beginning of the third century, the 
usurpation of administrative powers was a matter of slow 
growth. The sporadic practice of sending out imperial 
commissions, vice-imperial prefects, and special agents 
(curatores) who controlled the expenditure of money from 
the imperial treasury, gave way to a more systematic 
control of municipal affairs under Trajan. In his reign 
many cities had become involved in serious difficulties 
either through mismanagement of their funds, or decline 


* Cf. pp. 84 f,. 
[200%] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


in their revenues, and special officers were appointed by 
the imperial government to examine and regulate methods 
of civic administration. There were two classes of these, 
the curator rei publicae (Noytorys) and the legatus Augusti ad 
corrigendum statum liberarum civitatum, more commonly 
known as corrector (Svop$wrys or éravopOwrys). In a few 
instances in the East the titles were combined. 

The curator rei publicae’ was found in all parts of the 
empire, and apparently very few cities escaped his super- 
vision. Although he was elected in later times by the local 
senate, he probably retained the dignity of an imperial 
agent, outranking the other magistrates and gradually 
usurping their functions. As controller of the revenues 
and public lands, and possessing the right of veto, the 
curator played an important réle in undermining the in- 
stitutions, and in paralyzing the political initiative and 
independence of the municipalities with which he came 
in contact. The corrector exercised functions somewhat 
similar to those of the curator, but his powers were greater”. 
This official was usually appointed in senatorial provinces, 
in free cities (4iberae civitates), and in Italy and Sicily, and 
was a powerful factor in bringing those municipalities 
enjoying special privileges to the same footing as other 
towns in the empire. He also paved the way for the 
transfer of senatorial provinces to imperial jurisdiction. 

In the latter half of the fourth century the office of 
defensor civitatis (plebis) was created, primarily, to safeguard 
the interests of the common people®. While his duties were 
ill-defined at first, his high rank, long tenure of office, and 
the privilege of easy access to the governor or his superiors 
soon gave the defensor such prestige that the other muni- 
cipal authorities were completely overshadowed, and by 
the beginning of the fifth century he was the sole magis- 
trate in many towns. There is ample evidence that he 
sometimes allied himself with the land-holders and 


1 Liebenam, PAi/o/. 56 (1897), ago ts R.E. 5.0. curator; cf. pp. 90 ff. 
2 RE. s.v. corrector. . 5.0. defensor; cf. pp. 92 ff. 


[oni 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


cruelly oppressed the people whom he was supposed to 
protect. The office thus fell into disrepute, and in the 
reorganization effected by Justinian it became a liturgy 
imposed upon the leading citizens in rotation. 

The provincial governor in the republican period was 
supreme in the territory over which he exercised jurisdic- 
tion. His powers were limited only by the /ex provinciae, 
his own conscience, and the force of public opinion at 
Rome. Verres in Sicily and Cicero in Cilicia busied them- 
selves with the details of municipal administration, and the 
former had little regard for the interests or privileges of 
the cities under his authorityt. In the early empire the 
rights of the towns were more jealously guarded, especially 
in senatorial provinces, and many cities, disregarding the 
governor, appealed directly to Rome. The correspondence 
of Pliny reveals how far he was restricted in initiative even 
in matters of trifling detail?. In the latter part of the second 
century the governor exercised more extensive powers. He 
had the privilege—frequently exercised—of taking part 
in the deliberations of the local senates, and of making 
nominations for magistracies and liturgies®. Since civilians 
were usually responsible as sureties for the candidates 
whom they nominated, the governor was called upon to 
exercise this duty more and more frequently as the burdens 
of office and public service became more oppressive. If 
any candidate refused to hold office or to discharge a 
liturgy, the governor had the power to compel him to do 
so. Many other matters of municipal administration came 
under his jurisdiction, such as the formation of the a/bum, 
the construction of public works, the sending of embassies, 
and the enforcement of the laws regarding curiales and 
guilds®. In the reorganization of the empire effected by 
Diocletian, the limitation of the size of the provinces 


1 Cicero, in Verr, 2. 15, 22, 24, 25, 40; Cowles, Gaius Verres, 27 ff. 

> Cf. pp. 149 f. ° Dig. 49. 4. 1, 3,43 S pp. 85 7, 98 f. 
* Cf. pp. 97 f- 

§ Dig. 1.16. 185 50. 3. 1, 23 50. 4. 3, 8, 93 §0. 10. 2, 3, 53 of. pp. 193 ff 


[ 262h] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


greatly increased the powers of the governor by enabling 
him to exercise a closer supervision of the municipalities 
within his district. ; 

While the growth of vast imperial and private estates 
checked the spread of municipal institutions, it is difficult 
to determine how far the presence of such estates in 
municipal territories limited the administrative powers of 
the local authorities. In the civil wars of the third century 
and in the late empire when the central government was 
powerless to check the oppressive exactions of the bureau- 
cratic officials or the ravages of lawless troops and local 
brigands, individual citizens, and sometimes entire 
villages, placed themselves under the protection of some 
wealthy landlord!. As a result their properties passed 
from municipal control, although the local senate was 
still liable for the taxes on such lands. The emperors 
sought in vain to check the growth of private patronage. 
The owners of the great estates were able to defy the tax- 
collectors; and since any deficiency in the quota of taxes 
assessed upon the municipality had to be made up by the 
curiales, many of them were impoverished by the increase 
of Jatifundia, and the municipal organization was so 
seriously weakened that it ceased to fulfil its functions in 
many cities*. The same effect was produced by the de- 
velopment of great imperial estates which rapidly increased 
in all parts of the empire through bequests, fines, and 
confiscations?. Not only were these lands withdrawn as 
a source of municipal revenue, but tenants of the emperor 
were exempted from municipal charges. In 342 a law 
was passed by which curiales who leased less than twenty- 
five tugera were required to discharge their curial obliga- 
tions, but in view of the increasing difficulty of finding 


1 Zulueta, de patrociniis vicorum; Libanius, de patrociniis, 4 ff. 

2 Libanius, /oc. cit.; cf. no. 190. 

3 Mommsen, Strafrecht, 1005 ff.; Cod .F. 10. 38. 1 (396); nos. go, 
TS 


[ 203 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


suitable tenants, it is doubtful if the law was ever rigidly 
enforced}. 

The extant municipal charters show that the local 
magistrates had jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases 
within certain limits®. The /ex provinciae probably defined 
the right of individual cities in the administration of 
justice. In cases where local jurisdiction was not per- 
mitted, the law was administered by the governor or by his 
agents delegated for the purpose’. The governor’s edict, 
according to which he dispensed justice in his circuit, 
was based on that of the Roman praetor, and was instru- 
mental in spreading familiarity with Roman jurisprudence 
among the provincials. In Spain and Gaul the native 
law was primitive and had little importance under Roman 
rule. Under the republic the Greek cities clung jealously 
to their own legal system, and valued the right to use their 
own laws as an evidence of fancied autonomy. While the 
influence of Greek jurisprudence may be traced in the 
Byzantine age, the existence of local courts is rarely 
proved after the third century4. In the imperial period 
the Roman law and the Roman courts seem to have grown 
steadily in favor. Various causes may have influenced this. 
development. The dominance of the state and of imperial 
legislation, the partiality and corruption of a local judiciary 
in an oligarchical government, the appointment of iuridici 
in Spain and Italy and of curatores rei publicae in provincial 
cities, the right of appeal, and the extension of Roman 
citizenship all tended to weaken the local courts and 
extend the use of Roman law. The reorganization of the 
provinces by Diocletian gave the civil governor (now 
usually styled iudex) greater opportunity to supervise the 
administration ofjustice. Legislation enabling the governor 
to decide cases summarily without the assistance of a 


1 God. Th. 12. 1. 33 (342); no. 142. 

2 Nos. 27, 64, 65; cf. pp. 60 ff. 

8 Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 352 and note. 

* Cf. no. 133 and C/L. 111, 412 for late examples of municipal courts. 


[ 204 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


bench of iudices!, and to appoint judges (iudices pedanei) 
for petty cases must have weakened the power of local 
magistrates very considerably”. The Codes of Theodosius 
and Justinian scarcely mention them in a judicial capacity. 
In the fourth century the defensor plebis and the Christian 
bishops probably absorbed whatever judicial power still 
remained in the hands of the local magistrates. While 
resort to the ecclesiastical courts was purely voluntary, 
their simplified procedure and the moral weight of their 
decisions made them so popular that they attracted cases 
even from the courts presided over by the governor?. 

As the political institutions of the municipalities were 
decaying, the structure of their social life was being slowly 
transformed. The citizens might be divided into two great 
classes, those who were under obligation to discharge 
municipal liturgies, and those who were exempt from such 
burdens. The privilege of exemption was enjoyed by 
priests of the local and provincial cults, soldiers and 
veterans, members of the imperial bureaucracy, a limited 
number of physicians and teachers in each community, 
and, after the beginning of the fourth century, by officers 
of the Jewish and Christian churches. But the most 
important group was composed of those who held patents 
of imperial nobility, for in their hands was concentrated 
the wealth of the municipality. The passion for imperial 
honors almost became a mania amongst provincials, and 
the emperors bestowed the grant freely, either as a means 
of purchasing the loyalty of the provinces, or as a source 
of revenue, or as a reward for public service. The privileges 
of the senatorial order were hereditary, and in the fourth 
century, when municipal duties became a burden to 


1 Arnold, Roman Provincial Administration, 189. 

2 Cod. Th. 1. 16. 8 (362). The office of index as a municipal liturgy is 
referred to in Dig. 50. 4. 18, 14. Cf. Mitteis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht 
and Grundziige zur Papyruskunde. 

TA Cog tT Ze 8s 8t 1.0315); 112 31s GOs), 

4 Vinogradoff, Cam. Med. Hist. 1, 565 f. 


[ 205 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


citizens, the titles of nobility were illegally purchased or 
fraudulently assumed by wealthy families in order that 
they might escape their local obligations. This evil be- 
came so serious that the order of curia/es was in danger 
of disappearing in many cities, and the emperors sought 
to remedy conditions by cancelling all honors illegally 
secured, and by raising the standard of requirements for 
future grants. In 390 the hereditary privileges were 
withdrawn, except in the case of the highest rank (z//ustres), 
and three years later it was decreed that the property of 
those receiving senatorial honors should remain subject 
to its former liturgies. Theodosius II finally closed the 
ranks of the nobility to those of curial origin. 

In the fourth century the curia/es constituted the great 
middle class in the municipalities, and they were grouped 
by the laws into a distinct order composed of all citizens 
eligible for public office, or capable of discharging the 
liturgies imposed for the maintenance of civic and 1m- 
perial administrationt. In consequence of their oppressive 
burdens members of this class attempted in every possible 
way to escape from their order, and the emperors were 
continually devising legislation to hold them to their 
obligations. Membership became hereditary, and no one 
could leave his native place except on pain of discharging 
the liturgies of his former as well as of his new home. He 
was even forbidden to take up his residence on his country 
estate to escape the liturgies of the city. No one of curial 
birth could enter the army, the clerical orders, the 
monastic life, the imperial service, the guilds, or the service 
of a wealthy proprietor as a steward or a co/onus. The goal 
of imperial honors was only possible under conditions 
which were made increasingly difficult, and was finally 
denied to curiales altogether. Those who sought to enter 
any order or profession which carried the privilege of 
exemption from liturgies, were compelled to return to 
their former station. ‘he emperors finally found a simple 


i'Cfhopp ney. 
[ 206 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


remedy to prevent defection from the order by attaching 
the liturgies to the estate instead of to the individual. 
Property of curiales could not be sold without the consent 
of the governor or of the curia. The purchaser of such an 
estate assumed the civic liabilities attached to it. Bequests 
to non-members of the order were penalized by partial 
confiscation, and special legislation was devised in regard 
to the property of heiresses who married outside of their 
order or of their city. In spite of the laws, the curiales 
steadily diminished in number, although they were re- 
cruited in various ways. Sons of veterans who did not 
enter the army were regularly enrolled, although it is 
difficult to see what strength they could have given to the 
order. On occasion, plebeians and members of guilds 
who had acquired a certain amount of wealth were com- 
pelled to joint. Provincial governors even condemned 
criminals to the order as a punishment, although it is 
probable that such cases were limited to those of curial 
origin, or to those who were avoiding military service?. 
Members of guilds of various trades were granted 
partial immunity from liturgies in return for some specific 
duty which they undertook for the common weal*. Most 
of these guilds were in the imperial service, such as the 
alimentation of Rome, the mint, the mines, the factories 
for textiles and arms, and the like. A few were under the 
control of the municipal authorities and their members 
were required to act as firemen, to provide for public 
baths, to furnish entertainment in the theatres, or to dis- 
charge other duties. While we are fully informed about 
the imperial guilds, the Codes give little attention to the 
municipal corporations, but it is probable that the legisla- 
tion governing the former applied to the latter as well. 


1 The fullest treatment of the subject of guilds may be found in Walt- 
zing, Etudes historigues sur les corporations professionnelles chez les Romains; 
cf. R.E. s.v. collegium; Abbott, Te Common People of Ancient Rome, 
205 ff.; Declareuil, op. cit. 153 ff, 185 ff. 

2 Declareuil, op. cit. 192/f. 3 GRippsit07 ff. 


[ 207 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


In 337 Constantine granted complete exemption to a large 
number of trades in the municipalities, without specifying 
that they should be united in corporations for any special 
duty, but the evidence from inscriptions would lead us to 
believe that the guilds had become universal, at least 
throughout the western provinces, by that time. Early 
in the fifth century all citizens of towns were required 
to enroll themselves either in the order of curtales or in 
one of the guilds. 

Under the early empire the service rendered to the state 
by the guild was not compulsory, and partly by grants of 
immunity, partly by pay, the government was willingly 
served. But in time the burdens became intolerable. 
Membership became hereditary, and the choice of a pro- 
fession was no longer a matter of personal preference but 
of birth®. Once enrolled in a guild, no member could 
escape, and he was confined for life to his profession 
and his place of origin®. One suspects that this legislation 
was devised in favor of vested interests as a means of con- 
trolling the supply of labor, but it is also possible that it 
was demanded by the guilds themselves to protect their 
own organization when the duties imposed upon them 
became so heavy that it was difficult to retain their mem- 
bership. Be that as it may, the most important source for 
recruiting new curiales was closed, and the development of 
trades and industries in new places was checked because 
the free movement of skilled labor ceased. 

The only class in the municipalities not affected by 
imperial legislation was the proletariat or ima plebs. The 
practice of Rome in maintaining this parasitic element 
by public charity was unfortunately widely copied, and 


1 Cod. Th. 12. 1.179 (415). This law does not reappear in the Justinian 
code and may not have been long enforced. 

2 RE. s.v. collegium. 

3 In 371 Valentinian ordered that zavicularii should be perpetuo obnoxii 
functioni (Cod. Th. 13. 5. 14). Other guilds were soon brought under the 
same regulations (Declareuil, op. cit. 186). 


[ 2o8 y 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


imposed a serious charge on the civic budget. Not only that, 
but the glamour of ancient urban life attracted labor from 
farms and other industries where a bare livelihood was 
gained by arduous toil. In the city one could be fed and. 
amused at the expense of the state, and when the capitatio 
plebeta was removed from the residents of the towns, we 
cannot wonder that the urban movement went on apace. 

This survey of the social organization in the fourth 
century reveals the deplorable plight into which the 
citizens of the municipalities had fallen. While it is 
doubtless true that the heavy taxes and the oppressive 
liturgies contributed a great deal to the distress of the 
curiales and guilds, these burdens could have been borne 
if they had been imposed while the municipalities were 
enjoying uninterrupted prosperity. But it is clear that the 
favorable economic conditions which prevailed in the first 
century had given way to widespread and long continued 
depression. The population was decreasing in numbers, 
and the revenues of the towns as well as the wealth of the 
citizens were diminishing. There was grave danger that 
the municipal organization, which was still of the highest 
importance, especially as an instrument of tax-gathering, 
might disappear. This was the compelling reason which led 
the central government to interfere in municipal adminis- 
tration, to build up elaborate bureaucratic machinery, and 
to devise stringent legislation controlling the private life 
of the individual citizen. 

In studying the economic conditions of municipal life 
in the ancient world we must bear in mind that the in- 
dustrial city of the modern type was unknown. Labor 
costs were practically uniform throughout the empire, 
and inland towns could not build up a foreign trade 
because of the difficulties and costs of transportation. Only 
in cases where there was a monopoly of some natural 
product, such as papyrus, dyes, metals, special clays, or 
finer grades of wool, could industries develop and com- 
pete successfully in distant markets. Cities favored by 


AMA [he2OOmt 14 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


exceptional facilities for transportation, either on some great 
trade-route or with easy access to the sea, often developed 
important industries, but manufacturers usually depended 
on the local market within the bounds of their own terri- 
torium!. In the vast majority of cases the wealth of the 
city and the prosperity of its industries depended upon the 
economic welfare of its agricultural class. In the modern 
world all industrial activities are powerfully affected in 
normal times by rich harvests or by the failure of crops; 
and in the ancient world industry and agriculture were 
even more closely related. Besides, the revenues of the 
cities were largely derived from public lands, and the 
majority of wealthy citizens were owners of great estates. 
It is, therefore, apparent that the most powerful factors 
affecting both public and private economic life must be 
sought in an investigation of agricultural conditions 
throughout the empire. 

There is ample evidence that the soil was being 
gradually exhausted in the older provinces even under the 
republic’. The early colonial assignments were seven 
iugera. ‘(hese were increased to thirty by Gracchus and 
to sixty-six by Caesar?. While it might be unsafe to draw 
the inference that land which once supported nine persons 
hardly sufficed for one at the beginning of the empire, 
yet the increased area of the later assignments is significant 
of a progressive decline in fertility. Columella, writing 
about A.D. 60, states that a fourfold return in grain was 
unknown on Italian farms at that time*. The soil of Sicily, 
Sardinia, Spain, Gaul, and Africa was exhausted in turn. 
The eastern empire undoubtedly gained its longer lease 
of life from the bounty of the Nile and the rich lands 
bordering on the Black Sea. As the soil grew sterile, 


* Westermann, 4m. Hist. Rev. 20 (1915), 724f7.; Meyer, KJeine 
Schriften, 79 ff.; RE. s.v. Industrie. 

2 Weber, Handwirterbuch der Staatswissenschaft, s.v. Agrargeschichte; 
Simkhovitch, Political Science Quarterly, 31 (1916), 201 f.; Heitland, 
Agricola. 

3 Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 2. 87 ff. 4 Columella, 3. 3. 


[eZ tony 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


agriculture became unprofitable and farms were aban- 
doned. Under such conditions there would naturally be 
a shift of the agricultural population to more fertile areas, 
but the law of origo, which forbade the free movement of 
settlers from one municipal territory to another, was fatal 
to the best interests of agricultural development. The 
poorer farmers had the choice of two alternatives, either 
to join the urban movement, or to attach themselves to 
some patron as his coloni. The problem of resettling the 
waste fields was attacked by all the emperors. Augustus 
and his successors founded colonies. Tiberius forced 
capitalists to invest in lands!. Nerva spent sixty million 
sesterces in purchasing estates to be distributed among 
farmers”. Generous alimentary laws were enacted for the 
support of the agricultural classes. Veterans were given 
free allotments. Pertinax allowed squatters to occupy 
uncultivated fields, even on imperial estates, and if they 
brought their land under cultivation, full title of owner- 
ship was granted. Three years’ exemption from taxes was 
also allowed. Later more drastic legislation was attempted. 
Owners of fertile fields were required to take over deserted 
plots, and taxes were imposed in order to compel them to 
cultivate these lands. This system, called adiectio*, was 
oppressive and naturally unpopular, and was finally 
abandoned in 412. Restrictive laws were also drafted. An 
owner who found his estate unprofitable was forbidden 
to sell his farm slaves without a proportionate amount of 
his land5. The slaves were thus bound to the soil; and the 
same law was ultimately applied to the tenants or coloni®. 


1 Tac. Ann. 6. 16, 17; Suet. Tid. 48. Trajan required provincials who 
were candidates for office in Rome to invest a third of their wealth in Italian 
teal estate (Pliny, Epp. 6. 1. 9). 


2 Heitland, Agricola, 272. 3 Herodian, 2. 4, 6. 
* Cod. F. 11.58. 15 11.59. 5 (364-375), 9 (394), II (400), 14 (415), 
16 (419). 


PY Cod. Ff. 11. 48. 2 (357), 0 (366), 7,00 
6 The co/oni were virtually bound to the soil by the legislation of Con- 


stantine (Heitland, op. cit. 393_f7-). 


[ 2are a] 14-2 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


It was also forbidden to sell a fertile part of an estate 
without a proportionate amount of sterile land?. That all 
these measures failed in their purpose may be seen from 
the fact that in 395 there were over half a million iagera 
of deserted farms in the single district of Campania’. 

The exhaustion of the soil was due in large measure to 
the primitive methods of agriculture which had been 1n- 
herited from prehistoric times®. Such antiquated tools 
were used that two or even three plowings were necessary 
before the ground was ready for seeding. Shallow cultiva- 
tion was the rule, and the resources of the subsoil were 
never tapped. Under these conditions the surface soil 
soon lost its accumulated store of humus. The supply 
of natural fertilizer was insufficient to restore the necessary 
elements to the land when it had become impoverished 
by frequent cropping. Artificial fertilizers were not avail- 
able, and the modern practice of restoring nitrogenous 
elements by sowing clover was unknown. While the theory 
of rotation of crops was familiar to writers on agriculture, 
the majority of the farmers preferred to allow the land to 
lie fallow in alternate years*. It cannot be determined 
whether the general desiccation, which spread over central 
Asia about the beginning of the Christian era, extended 
also over the Mediterranean basin and affected the fer- 
tility of the soil; but it is probable that cities of Syria and 
northern Africa developed under conditions of greater 
humidity than now prevail in those regions. 

Deforestation played a large part in destroying agri- 
cultural lands. As cities developed, the hills were stripped 
of forests to supply building material. As a result the 
moisture was not conserved in the ground, and the rain, 
flowing in torrential streams down the mountain-sides, 
not only left them bare of soil, as they are at the present 

1 Simkhovitch, of. cit. ; SuPeAT Tae: } 
Mig. LA LT 8. 2 Gan pate: aie 


® Simkhovitch, Political Science Quarterly, 28 (1913), 383 f. 
4 Heitland, op. cit. 291. 


[oo 2aewa 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


day, but also filled up the water-courses in the plains 
below, creating malarial swamps where rich fields had 
once supported a large population. In Syria ruins of 
numberless towns are found in a region where wastes of 
barren rock now render the country absolutely impossible 
for human habitation. Yet this district once supported a 
great population enriched by the culture of the vine and 
olive. Recent investigation has shown that lumber was 
once plentiful in this region, and that the reckless stripping 
of the forests on the hillsides was the chief cause of the 
desolation which exists todayt. In Greece, Italy, and in 
fact in every part of the Mediterranean basin where forests 
could be exploited for their lumber, the same process may 
be traced ?. 

Not only was the fertility of the soil declining, but other 
adverse economic conditions faced the agricultural class. 
Those settled in the older provinces were brought into 
competition with farmers exploiting the virgin soil of 
each new addition to the empire. In particular, Egypt was 
not only endowed with a marvellous system of transporta- 
tion, but also renewed its rich fertility annually. Although 
Egypt as a granary was a source of strength to the empire, 
its possession dealt a serious blow to agriculture in other 
provinces where the yield per acre and per unit of labor 
was immeasurably less. Moreover, the great estates which 
rapidly developed in every province could be worked more 
economically than the small farm. The owner of small 
holdings was compelled either to exploit his land and 
exhaust it more rapidly, or to bring larger areas under 
cultivation, although the latter alternative was almost 
impossible because of the difficulty of securing labor. In 

1 Butler, Geographical Review, 9 (1920), 78 ff. 

2 Cf. no. 118. The effects of deforestation in Greece and Italy are well 
known, but no study of the ancient problem has yet been made. 

3 On the great estates there was greater opportunity for diversity of crops, 
and probably more scientific methods were followed there than on the small 


farms. The wealthier landowner could tide over a succession of bad years 
in certain crops where his poorer rival must succumb. 


[ 213) 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


the era of peace which followed the establishment of the 
empire, cheap slaves disappeared from the market, and 
the constant demand for recruits for the army drained the 
country districts of their vigorous manhood?. The poorer 
farmers were unable to meet the new conditions and 
many became involved in debt to the wealthy proprietors 
in their neighborhood. In the course of time they were 
obliged to surrender their property in payment of debts, 
and many were compelled to work out their obligations 
by remaining on their farms as tenants, and thus the way 
was prepared for the introduction of the colonate. Others 
abandoned their farms and flocked to the cities to be 
supported by municipal charities? 

The lack of a cheap and adequate system of trans- 
portation was a most serious handicap to farmers living in 
inland districts. Grain is a difficult commodity to transport 
by land, and only those living within easy access to water- 
routes could hope to compete in distant markets. In the 
fourth century even the sea became practically closed 
to free commerce, partly because of the rigorous control of 
shipping by the government and partly because of civil 
wars. In the case of those farmers who were compelled 
to seek a market within the limits of their own township, 
prices were often controlled by the system of municipal 
charities whereby grain was purchased at a fixed price 
and distributed to the proletariat as a free gift, or at a 
nominal charge. Where transportation was difficult, the 
burden on the agricultural class was further increased by 
the heavy cost in time and labor of the liturgies imposed 
for convoying supplies for the army, or for the taxes paid 
in kind. The charges for the imperial post were particu- 
larly severe, especially in the later empire. 

Municipalities not only suffered a loss in revenues from 
the decline in value of their public lands, but also lost 


1 The aurum tironicum was later substituted, cf. Journ. Rom. Stud. 8 


(1918), 26 fF. 


2 Heitland, of. cit. 336 to end, passim. 
[ 214 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


large portions of their territory, either through enforced 
sales to discharge public indebtedness, or by confiscation. 
Some of the emperors regarded municipal ownership 
lightly, and rounded out their own estates or gave gene- 
rous gifts to friends from this sourcet. Prosperou 
villages often gained municipal status, and were assigned 
a part of the territory of their mother city. Similar losses 
were incurred in the anarchy which prevailed during long 
periods of wars, when fortified villages usually became 
isolated and independent communities (castra, oppida). 
Some of these villages adopted the magistracies and forms 
of municipal administration, but the majority were 
governed by an imperial or municipal official such as a 
curator, defensor, or magister vici®. In consequence of the 
development of private patronage, as we have already seen, 
village-communities and private property passed out of the 
control of the municipalities. On the other hand, gifts 
and endowments in the early empire were often made by 
transferring landed estates to a commonwealth. The 
problem of making an endowment perpetual was a matter 
of genuine concern in the ancient world, and the method 
devised by Pliny, though expensive, probably represented 
the best policy which the jurists could devise in that age?. 
He also confesses the defect in the system which must 
have applied to all public leases, especially to those of 
short terms, namely, that the lessee was prone to exploit 
the land during the tenure of his contract, and to surrender 
the property at the expiration of the lease with its value 
seriously depreciated. A certain amount of territory was 
acquired through fines, but this source disappeared as the 
local magistrates lost judicial power. The estates abandoned 
by curiales could be added to the territorial possessions 
after three years, but it is doubtful if such additions were 
any gain’, If property could not be successfully managed 
1 Nos. 90, 157. 2 Declareuil, op. cit. 310 ff. PO PINV EO. 7a ros 


4 Cod. F. 10. 59. 1. ‘The property of decurions who died intestate went 
to the curia in later times (Cod. T'2. 5. 2. 1). 


[ 215 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


under private ownership, it was likely to be still less 
profitable under public administration. 

Shortly before the second Punic war a law was passed 
forbidding Roman senators to engage in foreign trade?. 
This legislation was destined to play an important part 
in the history of Roman agriculture, for the senatorial 
class was forced to invest in land. The possession of great 
estates soon became desirable in acquiring social prestige, 
and the growth of /atifundia began. But the prosperity 
of an agricultural state rests on the welfare of the small 
independent farmers in the community. This class, as we 
have seen, gradually disappeared as a few acquired wealth 
and gained senatorial honors, while the vast majority, 
unable to meet the competition of great estates or foreign 
producers, either joined the urban movement, or became 
tenants. As land became concentrated in the hands of a 
few, who were usually exempt from municipal obligations 
by virtue of their title of imperial nobility, the burdens 
of taxation and liturgies for the remaining citizens were 
greatly increased. Since the curiales were usually land- 
owners, their increasing charges became intolerable as 
their property steadily depreciated. In order to meet 
these charges, they were forced to exploit the land still 
more, and the process of deterioration was thus accelerated. 
Finally, many of them abandoned their property and fled 2. 
Others sought to enter some vocation which would give 
them exemption from municipal charges. The emperors 
strove to check this movement by binding the curiales to 
their place of origin, and by forbidding them to enter any 
of the privileged professions. Since these measures were 
ineffectual, laws were passed requiring that the property 
of anyone who gained exemption should remain under the 
jurisdiction of the curia. The sole recourse left to the 
distressed curial, short of abandonment of his property 
and flight, was the right of disposing of his property by 
sale. This privilege was virtually withdrawn when it was 

Lp Livy; 21.03: SOs pp. 113 ff. 
[25654 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


decreed that the consent of the governor or the curia was 
necessary before any legal transfer could be made. Viola- 
tions of the civil code were frequently punished by con- 
fiscation of property, which was added to the imperial 
estates. The municipalities accordingly suffered serious 
losses not only in the growth of private /atifundia, but also 
in the development of imperial holdings. In the fourth 
and fifth centuries the Church also gained control of great 
estates by gifts and bequests. These estates were all 
exempt from municipal obligations, until Leo and Anthe- 
mius decreed that all curial property should remain under 
the jurisdiction of the curia, even if it passed out of the 
hands of the curiales}. 

The legislation pertaining to the coloni may be traced 
in part to the scarcity of labor as the supply of slaves 
decreased, but the depreciation of the soil was also an 
important factor®. In early Roman husbandry voluntary 
tenancy was a familiar practice, but when Rome acquired 
her eastern provinces, she found a system of compulsory 
tenancy developed which differed little from medieval 
serfdom. The latter institution gradually spread over the 
whole empire, probably from the example set by the 
imperial estates. As we have already seen, the decline in 
the fertility of the soil led large numbers of farmers to 
incur indebtedness, which could only be discharged by 
working out their obligations in an involuntary tenancy 
from which they or their children could not escape. The 
spread of private patronage also fostered the development 
of the colonate, as farmers placed themselves under the 
protection of some neighboring land-baron, and, in return 
for the security of life and property granted them, entered 
his service in a relationship which ultimately became that 
of a colonus®. ‘The emperors were forced to hold these 


1 Cod. F. 10. 19. 8 (468). 
2 For the history of the colonate, cf. especially Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. 
Kol. and Heitland, Agricola. 


3 Zulueta, de patrociniis vicorum. 


[ 217 | 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


tenants in a form of perpetual leasehold in the effort to 
check the urban movement, and to secure an adequate 
supply of trained agricultural workers on imperial and 
private estates. By the beginning of the fourth century the 
coloni were bound to the soil in all parts of the empire, 
and in 367 it was further enacted that no land could be 
sold without the tenants attached to itl. A powerful 
instrument of oppression was put in the hands of the 
proprietors when they were held for the taxes of their 
tenants, and were authorized to collect them?. They were 
thus enabled to pass on the increasing weight of taxation 
to their co/oni, who were thus reduced to greater poverty. 
While the laws provided means of redress in cases of over- 
exactions, it is doubtful if any tenant ever dared to enter 
an action against his landlord®. In the fourth century the 
colont were reduced almost to the level of agricultural 
slaves. 

Keen civic rivalries led to the construction of great 
public works to vie with those of neighboring towns 
without regard to economic advantages or necessities, 
and in this way the civic treasuries were so often ex- 
hausted that the emperors forbade such undertakings 
without the approval of the provincial governor. Wealthy 
citizens were usually not averse to providing temples, 
baths, or other public works as a memorial for themselves, 
or as a means of securing civic honors, but there was no 
glory in providing an endowment for maintenance, and 
this charge usually fell on the municipality. From the 
modern point of view the ancient city spent a dispro- 
portionate part of its revenues on the amenities of life, 
for example, games, theatres, baths, banquets, religious 
ceremonies, and the like, while little was used for the 
development of economic resources. The widespread 
system of municipal charities, whereby the urban poor 
were fed and amused, was also based upon a vicious policy, 


tCog.\N 7.11.48, 2 (357). 2 Cod. Th. 11. 1. 14 (366). 
3 Cf. nos. 175, 180, 186, 190, 192. 


[i208 an 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


for it placed a premium on idleness, and fostered the 
movement from country districts to the towns. Moreover, 
the system of financial administration did not provide 
reserve funds from prosperous years against seasons of 
adversity. When hard times came, deficits were inevitable, 
and loans had to be made at ruinous rates of interest; 
and when a city once became involved in debt, escape was 
difficult. 

The cost of defending and governing the Roman 
empire steadily increased, while its resources in men and 
in wealth were steadily diminishing. The long series of 
defensive wars, and the struggles for the imperial power 
in the third century drained the resources of the citizens. 
When the power of choosing the emperor passed into the 
hands of the soldiers, they were quick to take advantage 
of their privilege, and increases in pay were often de- 
manded and granted?.: Besides, the donatives were liberal 
and all too frequent in the quick succession of imperial 
rulers. Fresh levies of recruits were constantly required 
because of the steady and severe fighting, and the virile 
man-power was heavily drawn on, or if levies were not 
provided, an equivalent in money was exacted. A serious 
burden was imposed by the billeting of troops in towns 
and villages. The unfortunate residents suffered from their 
greed and licentiousness, and frequent appeals were 
directed to the emperor, but although stringent legislation 
was enacted to check the evil, the laws were not backed 
by any power which could enforce them, and the evil 
appears to have continued unabated’. 

In the gradual concentration of power in the hands 
of the central government, the number of bureaus was 


1 The notorious case of the auction of the imperial throne by the prae- 
torian guard may be cited (Herodian, 2. 6. 6). 

2 It is recorded as one of the merits of Pescennius Niger that he re- 
strained the exactions of the soldiery (Hist. dug. Pescennius, 3). Cf. nos. 
113, 139, 141, 142, 143, 144, 152, 162, 163; Rostovtseff, Mus. Belge, 27 
(1923), 233f. 


[ 219 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


steadily increasing. The reorganization of Diocletian, by 
which the empire was divided into prefectures, dioceses, 
and small provincial units, while at the same time civil 
and military commands were separated, saved the empire 
from civil war and lessened the political power of mili- 
tarism; but the number of officials was vastly increased, 
and the expense of administration was more than doubled 
with, unfortunately, no corresponding increase in efh- 
ciency!, There was no effective method of controlling the 
various departments, and the elaborate system of espionage, 
created partly through a genuine desire on the part of 
the emperors to control abuses, and partly as a result of 
the natural suspiciousness of an autocratic government, 
only served to create new methods of oppression and cor- 
ruption. An edict of Constantine in 331 reveals the 
deplorable inefficiency of the central government in 
controlling abuses, and the widespread corruption of 
officials of all classes, not even excepting the provincial 
governors themselves*. The complaint that there were 
more people living upon taxes than paying them was 
undoubtedly an exaggeration, but there was a sufficient 
basis in fact to justify the statement®. In the fourth 
century the proportion of consumers and producers had 
become too nearly equalized for an agricultural common- 
wealth whose resources were declining, and which could 
not exchange its manufactured goods for food and raw 
materials from other nations in any appreciable quantity. 

The depreciation of the currency which had begun 
under Nero was continued by successive emperors, ig- 
norant of fundamental economic principles, as a means 
of replenishing their exhausted treasuries and of meeting 
the mounting expenses of bureaucratic administration. 
By the time of Aurelian gold had disappeared from circu- 
lation. The coins purporting to be silver contained about 
§ per cent. of that metal. Where the tribute or dues were 

1 Cam. Med. Hist. 1. 24 ff. 2 Cod. Th. 1.16.7 (331). 


3 Lactantius, de mort. persec. 7. 3. 


[Kpezonr 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


fixed, the depreciated currency meant a lightening of 
taxation, but when Aurelian made payments in debased 
coin and demanded taxes in another standard, he virtually 
multiplied the rates by eight. Diocletian devised a new 
system of taxation which applied to all provinces alike, 
and he abolished the tributes, which had been very un- 
equally apportioned. Under the new arrangement the 
privileges of immunity, which free cities and Italian towns 
enjoyed hitherto, were revoked!. The taxes were laid on 
land, which was classified according to its use for growing 
grain, or producing oil or wine. The various units were 
called iuga, each of which represented the number of 
acres which one man could work, and in the case of vine- 
yards or olive orchards were often rated by the number 
of vines or trees. Pasture lands were assessed according 
to the number of cattle. A head-tax was also imposed 
upon the agricultural laborers, men, women, and slaves. 
These taxes were levied in addition to those which had 
long been customary, the inheritance tax, customs dues, 
the aurum coronarium, the aurum oblaticium, and the 
tironicum. ‘The taxes instituted by Diocletian were 
reckoned in the produce of the soil and notin coin. He thus 
extended the system which had already begun under 
Alexander Severus when salaries were paid in kind. While 
Diocletian’s system of taxation was uniform in its applica- 
tion throughout the empire, and undoubtedly secured 
greater revenues, its injustice is apparent in that no dis- 
crimination was made between rich and poor iwga*. The 
assessment thus fell with undue severity upon the owner 
of unproductive farm land while his richer neighbor 
would escape with a comparatively light tax. The fact 
that the law-givers of the empire failed to devise an equit- 
able system of taxation based on sound economic prin- 
ciples must be considered as a very important factor in 
the decline of the middle and lower classes of land- 
* Cf. pp. 127 ff. 


2 Seligman, Essays on Taxation, s.v. Regressive Taxation. 


eee od 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


owners, on whom the assessments fell with disproportionate 
severity. 

The collection of taxes had been placed in the hands of 
local authorities ever since the system of farming out the 
revenues to the publicani had been generally abolished. 
The decemprimi and decaproti were responsible for the 
collection!, and any deficiencies were made up by them, 
but there is no evidence that this system was continued 
after Diocletian. A rescript of Aurelian made the whole 
order of curiales responsible, after the third year, for the 
taxes on estates abandoned by their fellow-members. In 
case they were unable to bear the burden, the land was 
to be distributed among the various local villages and 
estates*. Constantine issued an edict forbidding decurions 
to be held for the taxes of others?, but he later revived the 
law of Aurelian. Special imperial agents, called exactores, 
were deputed to assist in collecting arrears, but the prin- 
ciple of collective liability of the curiales seems to have 
been the rule. Not only were the curia/es responsible for 
the taxes on their own lands, but also, at least in certain 
periods, for those on senatorial estates. This burden was 
particularly heavy, because powerful land-owners could 
not be compelled to pay taxes. An interesting illustration 
of this is found in a law of 396 which separated senatorial 
and curial property, but when in the following year it was 
found that the revenue from the former had decreased by 
half, the old custom was revived whereby the curiales were 
responsible for both4. 

In addition to the taxes on land and on the agricultural 
classes, whether free, serf, or slave, the liturgies, both 
municipal and imperial, were imposed upon curiales with 
increasing severity. The maintenance of the imperial post 
was most oppressive; and the confiscation of municipal 
revenues caused the transfer of many liturgies, which had 
hitherto involved only personal service, to charges on 

PPS Oud. 0.18, 20. COM rT. Eis hO. sls 

Gog 2utt..7 22 (319). 4 Cod. Th. 6. 3. 3 (396), 4 (397). 


ete 720 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


propertyt. All these burdens fell on the land-owners, 
and were fatal to the development of agriculture. The im- 
position of the plebeian head-tax on the farmer and his 
help, while the city proletariat was exempt, gave, as a 
direct result, great impetus to the urban movement. 
Normally, the shifting of the population from the country 
to the town would inevitably adjust itself by bringing 
grain to a price which would encourage the revival of 
farming, but other factors prevented it. The population 
of the whole empire was decreasing as the result of 
plagues and famine, of the wastage of civil and foreign 
wars, and of religious persecutions”. The birth-rate also 
was steadily declining, although the emperors sought to 
encourage large families by elaborate alimentary laws and 
by grants of special privilege to families of three or more 
children. The maintenance of a large standing army 
where soldiers served long terms, although marriage was 
permitted them by Severus, the rapid rise of Christianity 
with the consequent increase in the number of men 
entering religious orders, and the development of monas- 
ticism increased the number of people who lived in 
celibacy. Towns dwindled to villages and finally dis- 
appeared. Only the few favored by exceptional environ- 
ment, or protected by secure walls of defence, survived 
the general decay. 

The growth of great estates and the disappearance of 
the small farmer deprived the local industries of their chief 
market®. Most of the estates had their own workshops 
where the simple tools and equipment were made, and 
much, if not all, of the food and clothing of the tenants 
was produced on the estate. There was little trade with 
the city, and this was carried on by primitive barter, since 
the depreciated coinage had no value as a medium of 
exchange. Foreign trade also declined as the local markets 

» GF Pp: 95.f- 
* Seeck, Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt, 1, 296 ff. 
3 Westermann, op. cit. 723 ff. 


[ 223 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


weakened. The division of the empire served to break 
trade-connections between the East and West, while the 
creation of the new capital at Constantinople put an end 
to many of the old trade-routes, and seriously affected 
the cities depending on them. The frontiers were fre- 
quently closed by wars, and trade with peoples outside 
the empire was broken off for long periods. The heavy 
burdens imposed upon ship-owners for the alimentation 
of the capitals strained the transportation system to the 
utmost. The cost of the government service was charged 
to the freight carried for private interests, and this practice 
served to discourage trade by sea. In the fourth century 
the feeling of imperial unity disappeared, and each pro- 
vince began to develop its own independent life as inter- 
course with other provinces ceased, and most of them 
became self-supporting and self-sufficient by necessity. 

Methods of manufacture were never improved in the 
ancient world, either because an adequate supply of slaves 
removed any incentive to develop mechanical devices so 
long as labor was cheap, or because inventive genius was 
lacking, or because traditional methods could not be 
varied by conservative people!. The restrictions imposed 
upon guild members controlled the supply of workmen, 
but were fatal to the establishment of new industries and 
to intellectual or material progress on the part of the skilled 
worker. The influence of state and municipal monopolies 
and the imperial workshops for munitions, clothes, and 
other articles may have played some part in the economic 
life of the municipalities in which they were located, but 
it is doubtful if they were important factors. 

While the worship of local deities undoubtedly con- 
tributed to the development of patriotism in the ancient 
city-state, the growth of scepticism and the influence of 
various philosophic systems had impaired the vitality 
of local cults long before the founding of the empire. The 
worship of the emperor was universal, and in this way may 

1 Meyer, Kleine Schriften, 79 f.; R.E. s.v. Industrie. 


[ 224 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


be said to have prepared the way for the adoption of 
Christianity, but it may be doubted if either of these cults 
had any real importance in municipal history in the im- 
perial period. The religious observances of pagan magis- 
tracies may have deterred Christians from seeking positions 
in the local government, but the early Church drew its 
members largely from a class which was ineligible for 
ofice. In the later period, when the Church began to 
attract members of the wealthier class, there is ample 
evidence that Christians took their part in municipal 
government!, After the recognition of Christianity as an 
official religion of the state every member of the com- 
munity stood on equal footing in regard to civic duties. 
When Julian sought to re-establish paganism, Christians 
“‘struck”’ in protest, but this is the only evidence of their 
unwillingness to take part in local affairs after Con- 
stantine?. 

The legislation dealing with the relations of Christians 
to the local curiae begins with Constantine. When he ex- 
empted officers of the Church from municipal liturgies, 
the curiales at once sought to enter holy orders, more 
from a desire to escape civil obligations than from any 
sincere religious conviction. There must have been a large 
number of Christians in the curial order, for Constantine 
was soon obliged to issue an edict forbidding them to 
enter the service of the Church. Similar laws were fre- 
quently issued by later emperors, but the very frequency 
of such legislation shows that the laws were continually 
violated®. In this way the municipality suffered a loss of 
curial members, but a remedy was found, as we have 
already seen, by subjecting the property of curia/es to the 
curiae when any member of the order took up a profession 
which gave him exemption from local obligations. Church 
estates also developed at the expense of the municipalities, 
and the burdens on the laity increased proportionately. 


1 Declareuil, op. cit. 97 ff. **C0ae LA. 12.1550 (362), 
3 Cod. Th. 12. 1 passim; 16. 2 passim; cf. pp. 110 ff. 


AMA [iyo mel 15 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


On the other hand, where the revenues of Church pro- 
perties were distributed in local charities, there was no 
economic loss to the community. 

While it may be true that Christianity turned the 
attention of its votaries to the future life rather than to the 
problems of the world about them, yet the identification 
of the municipality with the bishopric gave the Church 
a real interest in the preservation of the civic common- 
wealth. The development of the power of the bishop in 
judicial and administrative matters detracted from the 
influence of local magistrates, but the decline of municipal 
institutions began long before Christianity had become 
an important factor in the Roman empire. 

The biological theory of the decline of nations has 
received considerable attention in recent years. The prob- 
lem of race-mixture in the municipalities of the ancient 
world is a difficult study not only because of the lapse of 
so many centuries, but also because of the conflicting 
nature of the evidence. It is probable that most Italic 
and Greek stocks were themselves a mixture of different 
races. [here is, however, little doubt that races of the 
Italic peninsula in the era of republican Rome were, in 
the course of time, replaced by other nationalities. Few 
of the old Roman families can be traced far down in the 
imperial period, and recent investigation has shown that 
the population of Rome in the imperial period was largely 
of foreign origin!. Many of the Italians went out to the 
provinces where they were ultimately submerged in the 
native population. Italy became peopled by provincials 
and aliens, many of whom had risen from slavery. In all 
provincial cities the liberal attitude of slave-owners led 
to the development of a large class of freedmen whose 
descendants were politically indistinguishable from the 
original members of the community. The development 
of the doctrine of origo in the imperial period tended to 
keep each city a self-contained unit as far as race-mixture 

1 Frank, dm. Hist. Rev. 21 (1916), 689 f. 


[p22Gnn) 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


is concerned. Thus when the older members of the curial 
stock died out, their places would usually be taken by 
more progressive members of freedman origin. From the 
economic point of view, such replacements could hardly 
be considered as a loss to the community. The large influx 
of Nordic races in the later empire was far from being a 
source of strength to the community from the admixture 
of a purer and more virile stock. We are inclined to 
believe that the blending of races had less importance than 
the economic factors which we have already described in 
the decline of municipal life. Not less important is the 
fact that in the ancient city-state intellectual progress 
was closely related to political freedom and independence. 
Under the empire the government of each municipality 
came into the hands of a narrow oligarchy, which in turn 
was closely supervised by a paternalistic state. In the 
general atrophy of political institutions, even when the 
municipalities were enjoying great material prosperity, 
we must find the explanation of the loss of intellectual 
vigor, and the decline of literature, art, science, and 
philosophy. The influence of a court based upon military 
power and inspired by military traditions was also un- 
favorable to the development of any of the arts. Christi- 
anity turned its back on pagan culture, and when the new 
religion was adopted by the wealthier classes, the system 
of education which was devised for Christian youths led 
to a general disregard for the heritage of the past. 

In the later empire, when Hellenic culture had spent 
its force, the revival of Orientalism seems to have con- 
tributed to the return to the ancient village-communities 
which are characteristic of the Byzantine empiret. In 
the West the barbarian invasions caused the submergence 
of many municipalities and a form of tribal government 
appeared in many districts. Here also the village-com- 
munity was established and extended until it became a 
most important factor in the medieval period. It is, 

1 Ramsay, The Tekmorian Guest Friends, pp. 357-8. 


[ 227 ] 15-2 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


however, beyond the scope of this investigation to study 
the conflict of municipality, tribe, and village in the 
Middle Ages. 

To sum up briefly the principal causes which contributed 
to the decline of municipal life, economic decay was 
due primarily to widespread depreciation of the agri- 
cultural resources of the ¢erritoria through unscientific 
methods of farming and the exhaustion of the soil. The 
independent farmers who owned small estates constituted 
the most important class in the community, and they went 
down in the struggle for existence under unfavorable 
conditions of production and competition. Their farms 
were swallowed up in the /atifundia, or great estates in 
private or imperial hands, or they were abandoned and 
became waste. Rural desolation was aggravated by the 
urban movement, and as wide areas lay uncultivated, 
malaria, famine, and plagues followed, each taking its toll 
of vital energy and of the productive power of the empire. 
Trades and industries in the towns depended largely on 
the purchasing power of the local markets, and as these 
declined factories became idle and trade with other pro- 
vincial cities fell off. While the resources of the munici- 
palities and of their citizens were steadily declining, 
financial burdens were steadily increasing. The necessity 
of supporting a highly organized bureaucracy and of 
maintaining a huge standing army, almost constantly 
engaged in costly defensive wars, proved too great a task 
for a nation whose resources were largely agricultural 
and were in process of exhaustion. An attempt was made 
to meet financial difficulties by successive depreciations 
of the gold and silver content in the currency, but finally 
the imperial coinage ceased to have any value, and trade 
was carried on by barter, while taxes were collected in 
kind. Finally, Diocletian attempted a reform in the 
currency and in the system of taxation. The latter, 
although it swept away certain inequalities of the old levy, 
fell with especial severity on the agricultural classes, and 


[ 228°] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


was economically unsound in its discrimination against 
the owners of less fertile land. The farmers were forced to 
exploit their lands for immediate returns, and the process 
of exhaustion was accelerated. In addition to the heavy 
taxes, the liturgies imposed for municipal and imperial 
service became more and more burdensome as the number 
of citizens liable to such duties not only decreased, but 
also found their capital resources declining. When the 
fixed charges approximated to or surpassed the income of 
curiales, many of them abandoned their estates, or sought 
some way of escape from their obligations. Thus it is that 
we hear of deserted curiae, abandoned towns, and the 
rapid decline of municipal institutions. 

We have already traced the history of the transfer of 
judicial and administrative power from the municipalities 
to the central bureaucracy. To some extent this was due 
to economic causes, but imperial autocracy and local 
ineficiency played an important part. The whole ten- 
dency of Roman administration was to discourage demo- 
cratic government in the cities, and to place all power 
in the hands of an oligarchy. Thus the vast mass of the 
people lost the political instincts which they had developed 
in their ancient city-states, which had played so important 
a part in the growth of intellectual vigor. Under the 
empire the local senatorial oligarchy, usually limited to a 
hundred men in each city, became an hereditary organiza- 
tion, and as its members were secured from all danger 
of overthrow by internal revolution, we must believe that 
they ultimately became dominated by personal interests. 
The wealthy senators gradually withdrew from the local 
organization as they became members of the imperial 
nobility. The remainder, secure in their hereditary privi- 
leges, squandered the resources of the city and oppressed 
the people. For this reason imperial appointments of 
curatores and defensores were made, and the transfer of 
legislative, judicial and administrative power to provincial 
governors and bureaucratic officials began and speedily 


[ 229 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


developed. A vicious circle was established as the atrophy 
of municipal institutions led to increased imperial super- 
vision, and bureaucratic control stifled political inde- 
pendence and initiative. Finally, the curiales, facing 
economic ruin, were reduced to the position of an imperial 
guild, whose sole purpose seems to have been the collection 
of taxes and the performance of liturgies. As the municipal 
governments lost political responsibility, political ideas, 
and political instincts, the vital spark of ancient civic life 
perished, and this factor, no less than the economic forces, 
had a powerful influence on the decline of municipal 
institutions, and reacted with deadly effect on the political 
vigor of the whole empire. | 

The paralysis of social institutions, manifested in the 
creation of a rigid caste-system, binding the curiales, 
members of guilds, and agricultural workers to their place 
of origin and to the station of life in which they were 
born, was due in large measure to economic and political 
factors. The emperors owning vast landed estates, and 
controlling industrial monopolies, favored legislation 
which bound the laborer to the farm or factory. While 
this policy provided a temporary solution of the labor 
problem, and served vested interests, the result was not 
only fatal, economically, to the development of new in- 
dustries, but by depriving the individual of all power 
of initiative or free choice in his vocation, and of all 
incentive to material and intellectual progress, his powers 
of production were lessened; and the reduction of the 
bulk of the population to a condition of serfdom affected 
the cultural standards of the empire far more than did the 
barbarian inroads. In the effort to preserve the municipal 
organization, the curia/es were bound by legislation similar 
to that governing the guilds and co/oni. When the citizen 
became less important to the state than his property, the 
‘““sinews of the commonwealth,” as the curiales were 
styled in some of the Codes, were also paralyzed. 

It is futile to attempt to date the beginning of municipal 


[ 230 ] 


THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES 


decline. Many of the forces which combined to destroy 
civic prosperity and political vigor were already operative 
in the days of the republic. Their development was some- 
what arrested and obscured by the expansion of the 
empire, and by the prosperity which followed the restora- 
tion of peace and security. But the newer provinces soon 
came under the influence of the forces of decay, and the 
weakness of the municipal units quickly reacted on the 
empire as a whole, This was clearly revealed in the civil 
wars and barbarian invasions of the age preceding Dio- 
cletian. Thereafter the history of municipal institutions 
as a vital element in the Roman empire draws rapidly 
to'a close. The outward forms survived, but the breath 


of political life had departed. 


[ 231 J 


CHAP DERTLAY 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS AND THEIR 
PREPARATION 


ments on which our knowledge of the relations of the 

municipalities to the central government rests, it is 
important for us to have in mind the different forms which 
documents affecting the cities took, to know the procedure 
which was followed in receiving petitions from the muni- 
cipalities or from citizens of municipalities, or inquiries 
from the governors of provinces, and to be familiar with 
the method of reaching decisions on the points involved, 
and of transmitting them to the persons or communities 
concerned. In such an inquiry it is convenient to consider 
the republic and empire separately, because the attitude 
taken by the government at Rome toward provincial 
communities and its method of dealing with them changed 
from the one period to the other. We shall limit our dis- 
cussion to the period preceding the accession of Diocletian, 
because almost all our documents antedate his assumption 
of the imperial purple. 

The documents under the republic with which we are 
concerned fall into three classes: /eges, senatus consulta, and 
edicta. Leges, including under this head p/ebis scita, were 
enactments of the popular assembly under the chairman- 
ship of a Roman official. Measures whose precise terms 
were specified in the bill submitted to the assembly, and 
which the people were asked (rogatus) to adopt, were styled 
leges rogatae1. When the people delegated to a magistrate 
or to several officials the right to draw up a measure, the 

1 Specimens of these laws preserved to us on tablets are the /ex Antonia 
de Termessibus (no. 19) of 71 B.c. which isa plebiscite, and the /ex de Gallia 


Cisalpina (no. 27) enacted between 49 and 42 B.c. Fora full list of known 
leges rogatae, cf. Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani, 189-486. 


[ 232 ] 


“NOR the purpose of interpreting correctly the docu- 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS 


enactment was called a /ex data. Among the earliest of 
these measures were the /eges provinciarum1, which were 
prepared by commissions of ten senators. Municipal 
charters are commonly /eges datae*, and in one of them 
reference is made to the appointment of a commissioner 
to draw up the measure®. Less important matters affecting 
municipalities sometimes came before the senate*, and not 
infrequently the decision of the senate was communicated 
to the community in question in the form of a letter from 
a magistrate®. 

Of the edicts which magistrates of a certain rank were 
empowered to issue, we are concerned primarily with the 
edicts of the governors of provinces, which have been 
described in another connection®. The originals of the 
leges or senatus consulta were kept in the aerarium at Rome 
in the care of the quaestors’, and copies were sent to the 
communities concerned. The edicts of governors were also 
of course published in the provinces. 

Under the empire we find the two classes of /eges 
mentioned above, sexatus consulta, and edicts, as well as 
the constitutiones principum. During the principate of 
Augustus and in the first half of that of Tiberius we find 
some /eges rogaiae®, but before the close of Tiberius’ reign 
the popular assembly ceased to play an important part in 
legislation®. It was summoned, however, to confer the 


* Cf. pp. 487. ; ! 

2 Good specimens for the republican period are the tabula Heracleensis 
(no. 24) of 45 B.c. and the /ex coloniae Genetivae Iuliae (no. 26) of 44. B.c. 
For a list of known /eges datae, see Rotondi, op. cit. 487-507. 

S5G fanOu20eil. LEO. 4 Cf. nos. 5, 7, 10, and Bruns, 41. 

5 The 8.C. de Tidurtibus (no. 7) takes the form of a letter from the 
praetor who presided over the senate. The 8.C. de Oropiis (no. 18) of 
79 B.c. is a letter of the consuls embodying the decree of the senate. 

PEG Aippe sO fisino, 2. 

7 Cf. Servius on Aen. 8. 322; Livy, 39. 4. 8; Cic. PAi/. 5. 4. 12. 

8 Cf. Rotondi, op. cit. 44.1 ff. 

® Sporadic instances of the calling of the comitia for legislative purposes 
occur under Claudius (‘T'ac. 4zn. 11. 14) and Nerva (Dig. 47. 21. 3, 1). 
Cf. Liebenam, R.E. 5.v. comitia, 711. 


[ 233 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS 


tribunician power on the princeps and to define the func- 
tions of that office!, and probably in this measure he was 
empowered to found colonies*, to change the status of a 
colony or a municipium, to grant Latin rights to provincial 
communities, to give Latin communities Roman rights, 
and to grant municipal charters. One may say therefore 
that all the /eges of the imperial period, with which we are 
concerned, were /eges datae®. 

With the disappearance of the popular assembly, the 
importance of the senate as a legislative body increased 
for a time. This was a very natural result, and the prince 
may not have been unwilling to see the change come 
about, because the time was not yet ripe for him to make 
himself the sole law-making power in the state. A survey 
of the known decrees of the senate of the early empire 
confirms from the negative side the conclusion which we 
have just reached from the positive point of view in dis- 
cussing the /eges datae, for although we have a long list of 
senatorial decrees of this period of a legislative character?, 
none of them, except the ‘‘discourses of the prince,’’ deals 
with the relations of the imperial government to the 
civitaies. It is clear therefore that measures affecting the 
cities emanated directly from the emperor, and that the 
oratto principis in senatu habita is important for our dis- 
cussion. In the year 238.c. Augustus received the 
privilege of bringing up any matter in the senate which 
he chose to submit®. This right was later extended, so that 
the prince could make as many as five proposals, all of 
them to take precedence of motions made by other mem- 
bers of the senate®. In the absence of the emperor these 
messages, or “‘discourses of the prince,” were read by a 
quaestor and adopted as decrees of the senate without 


1 Cf. Mommsen, St. R. 3, 346, 349, n. 4. 2 Op. cit. 2, 888 77. 

® Cf. the /eges Salpensana et Malacitana (nos. 64 and 65) of a.v. 81-84. 

4 Cf. Karlowa, 1, 644-646 and Rudorff, Rim. Rechtsgeschichte, 1, 106— 
1209. 
5 Cf. Cassius Dio, 53. 32. 6 Cf. Herzog, 2, 691, n. 2. 


[ 234 ] 


AND THEIR PREPARATION 


change. Perhaps from the time of Hadrian no one but 
the emperor proposed a measure in the senate. From the 
close of the second century the jurists cite decrees of the 
senate as orationes rather than senatus consulta, and the 
language of command takes the place of conventional 
parliamentary forms!. Several of these ‘‘discourses”’ 
concern the municipalities?. The most noteworthy is the 
oratio Claudii de iure honorem Gallis dando®. Historically 
the “‘discourses of the prince’’ were related in their origin 
to the decrees of the senate, but later took legally the 
character of constitutiones imperatorum. The part which the 
senate played in the trial of provincial governors has been 
discussed elsewhere’. 

If we turn to the edicta, in addition to the edicts of the 
emperor, which will be discussed later, we find decreta 
concerning provincial communities®, especially to settle 
matters in dispute between them®. 

Along with the /eges datae the most important measures 
affecting the cities were the imperial constitutions. Of 
the constitutions we read in the Institutes: quodcumque 
igitur imperator per epistulam constituit vel cognoscens 
decrevit vel edicto praecepit, legem esse constat: haec sunt, 
quae constitutiones appellantur’. This is essentially the 
definition of Ulpian, quoted later in the Jmstitutiones*: 
Quod principi placuit, legis habet vigorem;...quod- 
cumque igitur imperator per epistulam et subscriptionem 
statuit vel cognoscens decrevit vel de plano interlocutus 
est vel edicto praecepit, legem esse constat. Haec sunt 
quas vulgo constitutiones appellamus. These two lists 


1 Cf. Girard, Manuel élém. de droit rom® 57. 

2 For a list of the principal orationes, cf. Cuq, *“‘ Mémoire sur le consilium 
principis d’Auguste 4 Dioclétien’’ in Mém. prés. par div. sav. 9, 2, 424-426. 
See especially no. 11. 

SyCfno. SOland Lac. A2f, 11°24: 4 Cf. pp. 1357, 165 ff. 

5 Cf. nos. 58, 109, 165 and C/G. 11, 2222. §& Cf. pp. 1527 

? Cf. Justinian, Jzst. 1. 2. 6. 

8 Cf. Dig. 1.4.1.1. Gaius (Jast. 1. 5) writes ‘‘constitutio principis est, 
quod imperator decreto vel edicto vel epistula constituit.”’ 


exiee 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS 


agree in their inclusion of the epistula, decretum, and 
edictum. They differ only in the fact that Ulpian adds the 
subscriptio, a special form of the letter, and mentions the 
interlocutory decree along with the decretum. To these three 
classes of constitutions most scholars add the mandatum, 
and the term rescriptum, rather than epistula, is a more 
exact general term for a public letter of the emperor!. 
Imperial edicts were similar in form to those issued by 
republican magistrates, but the right to issue them seems 
to have been conferred on Augustus by a special act about 
19 B.c.2 They were written in black letters on a white 
background?, and displayed in Rome and in the provinces, 
in both Latin and Greek, when necessary. Sometimes it 
was provided that the edict should be engraved on a 
bronze? or marble tablet®. They were sometimes addressed 
to a community. In this case they were published un- 
changed®. At other times they were addressed to an 
imperial official or the governor of a province. Such edicts 
the official incorporated in a proclamation of hisown’. A 
fair number of edicta principum are extant®, and some of 


1 For discussions of the different classes of comstitutiones and their nature, 
cf. Cugq, op. cit. 424-461; Mommsen, S¢. R. 2, 905 #7; Karlowa, 1, 646— 
654; Krueger, Gesch. d. Quellen u. Litt. d. rim. Rechts, 92-100; Bruns- 
Pernice in Holtzendorff’s Excyclopddie d. Rechtswissenschaft, 1, 1433 
Girard, op. cit. 58-61; Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 2_f7.; Haberleitner, 
Philol. 68 (1909), 283 ff. Haberleitner adopts the following classification: 
I (a) edicta, (4) orationes, (c) adlocutiones; II (a) epistulae, (6) rescripta, 
(c) subscriptiones; III (a) decreta, (4) interlocutiones. Faass, Archiv fir 
Urkundenforschung, 1 (1908), 221 f, finds one hundred and sixty-four 
imperial constitutions extant in epigraphical form. Of these one hundred 
and twenty-one are in Greek and forty-three in Latin. The most prolific 
emperors are Pius, Hadrian and Severus, with thirty-two, twenty-six, and 
sixteen respectively to their credit. Of the one hundred and forty epigra- 
phical constitutions which can be dated, one hundred and twenty-three 
antedate Diocletian. 


2° Gy. blerzog; 2, 1515 n. 1. 8 Gf a hivy; 1. 325. 23:9.746./5. 
BLOF. Gea. 12, '2.27. 1,6; 14. AAs NOGAOS B Gino. '5 I, 
6 Cf. no. 49. 7 Cf. no. 165. 


8 Rudorff, op. cit. 1, 132-1363 Cugq, op. cit. 456-459. 
[ 236 ] 


AND THEIR PREPARATION 


them concern the citiest. Technically edicts held good 
only during the reign of the emperor who issued them, but 
frequently by formal act or tacit observance they con- 
tinued in force after his death?. The subject-matter of 
an imperial edict was introduced by the characteristic 
formula: Jmperator...dicit or Avroxpdrwp.. .déye®. 
After this phrase the first person is used. The date and 
place of composition are indicated, usually at the begin- 
ning, sometimes at the end of the document*. The edicza, 
which have been discussed above, like the orationes, and 
the ad/ocutiones®, with which we are not concerned here, 
were addressed to the public. The other constitutions, viz. 
the rescript, the decretum, and the mandatum, were not 
necessarily intended for publication. 

Rescripts were sent in reply to the inquiries (re/ationes, 
consultationes) of provincial governors or other officials or 
in answer to the petitions (preces, ibe//i) of individuals or 
communities. Replies to officials usually took the form of 
independent letters (epistu/ae). In answering private 
persons or communities the emperor either appended his 
answer to the request or made notes upon it. His reply 
in the first case was called a subscriptio, in the second, 
adnotationes. The letters which passed between Pliny and 
Trajan furnish us with the best specimens to be found 
in literature of the inquiries of an official and the replies 
of the emperor. There are extant several important 


1 Cf. nos. 33, 49, 51; Gaius, Jzst. 1. 33, an edict of Nero conferring the 
right of Roman citizenship upon any Latin, who, having a fortune of 200,000 
sesterces, devotes half of it to the construction of a house in Rome; Dig. 
50. 7. 5, 6, an edict of Vespasian forbidding cities to send a deputation of 
more than three members to Rome; Pliny, N.H. 3. 3. 30, an edict of 
Vespasian conferring the ius Latii on Spain; Gaius, Jwst. 1. 93, defining the 
rights of peregrini admitted to citizenship; Dig. 50. 4. 11, an edict of Pius 
prescribing the cursus honorum for cities; Dig. 1. 5. 17, Caracalla’s edict of 
A.D. 212 (cf. no. 192). SrG FTO: at 

3\Cf. no. 49 and Bruns, 68, 69; Cod. F.3.13.23 3. 11.:13'7. 62. 6. 

4 Cf. no. 49 and Bruns, 94; Cod. F. 10. 61. I. 

5 Cf. for instance, Hadriani adlocutiones ad exercitum Africanum, CIL. 
Vill, 2532 = Dessau, 2487. 


[ 237 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS 


epigraphical rescripts dealing with municipal affairs'. 
Many imperial letters are of course to be found in the 
Justinian Code?. 

An epistula opened with the name and titles of the 
emperor in the nominative and the name of the addressee 
in the dative, sometimes with sa/utem or salutem dicit 
added’. This part of the letter is called the iuscriptio. At 
the end of the letter there is usually a word of greeting, 
and an indication of the date and place of composition 4. 
Rescripsi or scripsi found in subscriptiones is in the hand of 
the emperor, and recognovi, which appears at the end of 
them®, is probably the counter-signature of the official 
in charge of the bureau and certifies that the document 
correctly represents the decision reached in the case’. 
Proposita, which is common at the end of certain rescripts 
up to a.p. 291 8 and rare thereafter, indicates the date and 


1 Cf. nos. 61, 63, 151. The most complete specimens of subscriptiones 
on municipal matters are nos. 111, 139, Bruns, 84, and CJL. vi, 3770. 
No. 139, after certain introductory formulae, contains the preces of the 
Scaptopareni, followed by the decision of the emperor. For an analysis of 
no. 154, see the commentary on that inscription. For the character of the 
subjects covered in an adnotatio, cf. Seeck, R.E. 1. 382f. 

2 On relationes and consultationes, cf. especially Cod. F. 7. 61 and 62. 
For references to subscriptiones, cf. Cod. F.7.43.1; Dig. 4. 8. 32, 14. 

3 Cf. nos. 61, 63. 4 Cf. no. 61. 

> Cf. no. 111, col. 1v, 1. 8; no. 139; Bruns, 84. 

6 F.g. nos. 111, 139, and Bruns, 84. 

? Cf. Preisigke, Die Inschr. v. Skaptoparene, especially p. 63. ‘The term 
recognovi has given rise to much discussion. Mommsen holds (Ges. Sc&r. 
I, 479; 2, 179 #.) that the memorandum, as prepared by the official, and 
the final document, were laid before the emperor. Upon the former he 
wrote vescripsi, on the latter recognovi. Karlowa (Neue Heidelberger Fahré. 
6, 214 and Rom. Rechtsgesch. 1, 652, n. 1) thinks that the words attest the 
correctness of the document, when compared with the official copy kept in 
the archives. Cf. Brassloff, R.E. 6, 207 f., Kriiger, Gesch. d. Quellen u. 
Litt. d. rim. Rechts, 96, Preisigke, op. cit. 4-12, and Wilcken, Hermes, 55 
(1920), 55, 56, n. 3. 

8 Cf. for instance Bruns, 87, 88 and Kriiger, op. cit. 96, n. 43. Wilcken 
(op. cit. 14 ff.) thinks that the propositio applied to sudbscriptiones, but that 
epistulae were only published on order of the emperor, or the magistrate 
receiving them. 


[2B Rie 


AND THEIR PREPARATION 


place of publication!. Latin was the language regularly 
employed in rescripts, but some of those sent to Greek 
lands were in Greek?. Rescripts might confer a privilege 
or immunity on an individual or community, or decide 
an administrative matter, or they might settle a legal 
question. The influence of a letter of the former kind did 
not usually extend beyond the person or corporation 
concerned. Letters of the second sort furnished pre- 
cedents or legal principles for the future. Judicial 
epistulae increase in number with Hadrian. The increase 
may well be due to the issuance of the edictum perpetuum 
by Hadrian, and the consequent necessity of consulting 
the emperor on doubtful points?. 

As we noticed above, the jurists speak of three classes 
of constitutions, viz. edicts, rescripts, and decreta. In the 
early period, however, the expression decretum principis 
was applied to any announcement of the emperor’s will. 
In this early wide sense, therefore, it included all classes 
of imperial constitutions. In the narrower meaning which 
it commonly took in the later period, it is applied to the 
emperor’s decision on judicial questions submitted to him 
in the first instance or on appeal. To the list of constitu- 
tions given by the ancient jurists, modern scholars com- 
monly add the mandata or individual instructions given 
to governors and other officials, by which they were to 
be guided in the administration of their offices. Naturally 
in course of time a somewhat fixed set of principles or 
methods of government in the provinces had developed, 
so that a large part of the mandates given to one governor 
was identical with that of another governor. The practice 
of sending out the governor of a province with instructions 
goes back to the republican period®. The mandates were 

1 Cf. Karlowa, 1, 651; Brassloff, R.L. 6, 208; Preisigke, op. cit. 65. 

Oy ea ene lo 37 3/58 Tod Sa Same) RCO Os 2) 

3 Cf. Girard, Manuel élém. de droit rom. 59. 

4 Cf. Hesky, R.E. 4, 2289. A document which some scholars style a 
decretum is called by others a rescriptum. 


> Cf. Kriiger, op. cit. 99, n. 59. 
[ 239 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS 


of great importance to the municipalities, because they 
dealt especially with police regulations, criminal law, and 
the competence of a governor!. Mandates, for instance, 
forbade cities to make grants of money, instructed 
governors to apprehend and punish culprits wrongfully 
released by municipal magistrates*, and ordered them to 
send to the emperor for trial a decurion when charged with 
an offense which was punishable by exile or death?. 

If we turn now from a consideration of the documents 
themselves to their preparation, we notice that for a long 
time under the republic the senate directed the foreign 
policy of the Roman state. It appointed a commission 
of senators to draw up the /ex provinciae*; it received 
requests from cities for charters®, for a recognition of 
their independence’, for the granting of privileges ®, and 
the redress of grievances®. With the coming of the new 
régime, the princeps took over the provinces in which an 
army was needed, appointed his own financial repre- 
sentative in senatorial provinces, and exerted a great moral 
influence over all the provinces. The growing importance 
of the “‘discourses of the prince’’ must also have lessened 
the authority of the senate in foreign affairs. Naturally, 
therefore, inquiries and petitions from abroad came to be 
addressed more and more frequently to the emperor. In 
making his replies he needed helpers and advisers. As 
foreign questions grew in importance and numbers, the 
business was systematized, bureaus were established, and 
a board of imperial counsellors was organized. These 
bureaus were known as the officia or scrinia a rationibus, ab 
epistulis, a libellis, a memoria, a studtis, and a cognitionibus 19, 
The officials a rationibus had charge of imperial finances, 

1 For a list of items from certain mandata, cf. Cuq, op. cit. 460/f. 


2 Cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 111. Be DigA8. 35 TO. 
SOI NAS YOU. 27,(1,°2: . 75 IC fiom a Sup SeCic.an ery. 2.5122. 
“Ohno. 5. 8 Ditt. Sy3 601. 9% Cf. Bell. Afr. 97. 


10 For the development of these bureaus, cf. Hirschfeld, 29 f.,, 318 7; 
Cuq, op. cit. 363 ff.; Karlowa, 1, 544 7.3; Rostowzew, R.£. 6, 210 f7.; von 
Premerstein, R.Z. 4, 220 ff. 


[ 240 ] 


AND THEIR PREPARATION 


supervised, for instance, the collection of taxes, appro- 
priations for the army, for frumentationes, and for the 
construction of public works. The officials ab epistulis 
prepared and despatched imperial replies to the letters of 
governors and generals, and drew up instructions for 
imperial officials. The bureau a /ibe/iis had charge of the 
petitions addressed to the emperor by private persons or 
by communities, and concerned itself primarily with legal 
questions arising between subjects, or subject communities, 
and between them and the state. The bureau a memoria, 
which is not mentioned until rather late, assisted the 
emperor in cases requiring immediate action. It probably 
set down in writing the official speeches and oral decisions 
of the emperor and adnotationes. ‘The department a 
studtis grew out of the bureau a /bellis and perhaps in- 
vestigated questions outside of administration and law, 
such as those of religion. The officials a cognitionibus took 
up minor judicial questions, perhaps in civil cases only, 
which were not laid before the consilium. 

Matters which were too important to be submitted to a 
bureau came before the consilium principis, which owed its 
definite organization to Hadrian}. It was made up of 
certain trained jurists, receiving salaries, and known as 
consitiariu Augusti and adsumptt in consifium, and the amici 
and comites of the emperor who had no fixed salary”. The 
emperor presided and rendered the decisions. A vote was 
taken, usually by ballot, but the emperor was not bound 
by the opinion of the majority. 

It remains for us to consider briefly the method of 
preparing, publishing, and preserving state documents. 
An edict was of course drawn up by the magistrate issuing 
it. Sexatus consulta under the republic were put into their 


final form by a committee of senators?, and the method 

1 Hist. dug. Hadr. 18. 1. 

2 On the consilium principis, cf. Cugq, op. cit. 328 f.; Hirschfeld, 339 7.3 
Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 989 ff.; Seeck, R.E. 4, 926 f7.; Herzog, 2, 756 /7- 

3 Cf. the 8.C. de Bacchanalibus (Bruns, 36) and 8.CC. de ludis 
saecularibus of 17 B.c. (Bruns, 46). 


AMA fv 2400rt 16 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS 


of bringing bills before the popular assembly is so well 
known as to need no comment here. Important measures 
of any one of these three classes were engraved on wood, 
stone, copper, or bronze, displayed where they would 
be seen by people concerned, and copies of them kept in 
the temple of Saturn or in some other depository in Rome!. 
With the centralization of foreign affairs in the hands of 
the emperor, a large number of departments was organized, 
as we have already noticed. We can see in some detail 
the course which would be followed by a petition or an 
inquiry from a provincial community or a private person ®. 
The request might come through the governor of a pro- 
vince %, or it might be delivered at Rome in person or by 
a messenger*. On arrival at Rome it went to the proper 
department, and from there, if an important document, 
to the consilium. The emperor in the consiiium gave his 
decision in general terms; and the appropriate depart- 
ment put the reply in proper form. The head of the 
department wrote recognovi upon it to indicate that it 
conformed to the emperor’s decision and met the require- 
ments in the case, and to attest its authenticity the em- 
peror set down on it the word rescripsi or scripst. 

In cases of minor importance the facts and precedents 
were collected, and a tentative answer for the approval 
of the emperor was drawn up in a department. ‘The answer 
might take the form of an epistula, or independent letter, 
sent alone®, or accompanied by the /e//us®, or the form 
ofa subscriptio’ or of adnotationes. It might be sent directly 
to the inquirer’, or to him through an imperial official ® 
or some representative of the supplicant!®, Sometimes it 


1 Cf. Dziatzko, R.E. 2, 561 f.; Mommsen, S8¢. R. 3, 418 f.; Kubitschek, 
RELY, 287 ff - 

2 Cf. Preisigke, op. cit. 44 ff.; Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 38/7. 

3 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 58, 59. 

4 ‘The protest from the Scaptopareni (no. 139) was delivered by a certain 
Aurelius Pyrrhus, acting as an intermediary. 

SGFPn0; 01: 6 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 59. CE noe 3g: 

S Cyimos.59, 61,03.’ * Pliny, Bparadiran59-0 A Cf nossa 


[ 242 ] 


AND THEIR PREPARATION 


reached the petitioner in the form of a copy made at Rome 
by such a representative!. A brief analysis of one of the 
documents in which the last method of procedure was 
followed may illustrate many of the processes outlined 
above®. In Gordian’s rescript we have at the beginning 
the words Bona fortuna prefixed by the Scaptopareni when 
the rescript was engraved. Then come the date and place 
at which the copy of the original in the archives was made: 
Fulvio. . .scripta sunt. It is made at the instance of Aurelius 
Pyrrhus, the representative of the Scaptopareni, whose 
name and position are given. Immediately thereafter 
stand the preces of the Scaptopareni, followed by the de- 
cision of the emperor (/mp.. .debeas). The emperor has 
written rescripst and the director of the department, 
recognovi. In place of the names of the witnesses to the 
copy the Scaptopareni have had the word signa engraved. 
The original document in the archives, therefore, began 
with the preces and closed with recognovt. 

Interesting facts concerning a particular inscription 
may often be learned from an examination of it. An 
imperial letter sent directly to a community was usually 
addressed to the magistrates, senate, and people®, but 
sometimes to the magistrates and decurions only*. Occa- 
sionally reference is made to the deputies who brought 
the petition®, or to the intermediary at Rome who pre- 
sented it®, or the deputy records the fact that he has de- 
livered the emperor’s reply to the local magistrate’. In 
one letter we are informed that it was written in Latin 
and translated into Greek’, This letter, intended for 
certain troops, was published in their winter quarters?, 
and still another the duoviri had cut on stone!®, In those 


S.C fe. 1139; 
* This analysis of no. 139 is based on Preisigke, op. cit. 74, 76, 78-79 
and Wilcken, op. cit. 38 ff. See also the literature cited in note 7, p. 238. 


3° Cf no. 130. $) Ghia. 61. 5 Gf, no. 61. 
6 In no. rr1 a certain Lurius Lucullus. 7 Cf. no. 83. 
8 Cf. Riccobono, no. 66. 9 Lbid. 10 Gf. no. 615 


[ 243 ] 16-2 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS 


which have been copied from the originals in the archives, 
the copyist sometimes notes the change from one hand- 
writing to another in the original?. 

All subscriptiones were publicly displayed, as well as 
those epistulae whose publication the emperor or the magis- 
trate receiving them should order. Those concerning 
provincial communities were displayed both in Rome and 
in the community concerned?. They were also preserved 
in the Commentarii principum®, being assigned to different 
sections according to their contents. Inside these sections 
they were probably grouped under the several provinces, 
with subsections for each year*. Perhaps undevicensimus 
in the rescript of Pius to the Smyrnaei® indicates that this 
document is No. 19 in the roll for a certain quarter of the 
year®, With certain comparatively unimportant changes 
made in the organization and management of the archives 
in the period after Diocletian “ we are not concerned here®. 

In Egypt the imperial will is expressed by means of the 
oratio®, edictum™, rescriptum', and epistula\*. ‘The language 
employed in these documents is usually Greek, but Latin 
is also found. Edicts were commonly promulgated from 
Alexandria, but were also issued from other cities!®. Im- 


Buse DOMLUL, COL tv, Qs 

2 Cf. Preisigke, op. cit. 64 f7.; Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 1-42. 

3 von Premerstein, R.E. 4, 737 ff. 4 Cf. Preisigke, op. cit. 72. 

> Cf. Bruns, 84. 6 Cf. Wilcken, op. cit. 40. 

* For these changes cf. Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. 4, 845 /f. 

8 There is little definite information to be had about the archives, or 
commentarit, of the western municipalities except that which is to be found 
in two or three inscriptions (e.g. CJL. vit, 8. 15497; x1, 3614). Cf. 
Kubitschek, R.Z. 1, 298 f. For the Greek cities cf. Fahreshefte d. ist. 
archdol. Inst. 7, Beiblatt, 44; 16, 17 ff, 270, and especially, Wilhelm, 
Bettrage zur gr. Inschr. 258 ff. By the time of Justinian town records were 
no longer kept with any care, cf. Novellae, xv, praef. ‘“‘cum (defensores) 
nullum habeant archivum, in quo gesta apud se reponant, deperit quod 
conficitur.” 

® Mitteis, Chrestomathie, 370. 

10 Mitteis, op. cit. 372, 377; Ditt. Or. Gr. 664, 665. 
11 Mitteis, op. cit. 375, 376; Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 1 f.; Bruns, gr. 
12 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 153, 158; no. 189. pSaNO/ 195: 


[ 244 ] 


AND THEIR PREPARATION 


perial rescripts, as a general rule, were forwarded to the 
prefect and published in Alexandria. In a few cases they 
were sent direct to a local magistrate, although it is prob- 
able that a copy was also sent to the prefect. Imperial 
epistulae were sent to private citizens of Greek or Roman 
birth, Copies of these documents are comparatively rare. 
The prefect also issued edicts in Greek. They were pub- 
lished in Alexandria and usually forwarded with an 
epistula to the strategi with instructions to post them in an 
appropriate public placet. In one instance local magis- 
trates append their signatures to indicate their cognizance 
of the document, which seems to have been circulated for 
this purpose*. In another case the magistrate takes oath 
that the document had been published by him as directed 3, 
It is evident that edicts of the emperor and of the prefects 
and their rescripts were widely known to the public, since 
copies are found throughout Egyptian nomes and they 
are frequently cited by the natives. The minor officials 
of the bureaucracy also issued their instructions in writing, 
usually in the form of epistulae or émuard\para. 

Since the bureaucracy in Egypt was highly developed 
and the number of secretaries very large, the task of caring 
for the official records must have been very serious. That 
the archives were not always properly housed is evident?, 
and very little can be learned about the method of pro- 
viding for the municipal or village records. None of the 
numerous buildings or offices recorded in the papyri can 
with certainty be ascribed to purely municipal purposes’. 
Possibly, since the relation of state and municipality was 
so close, the records of both may have been combined. 

1 Nos. 162-165. 2 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 13. 

SOPRA EE Bed & 4 Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung, 6, 100 ff. 

5 ‘The more important buildings for preserving records in Egypt are the 
following: ypadetov, dyopavopetov, wvynEtov, dpxetov, ypappatopvAdktov, 
xopixy BiBrAvoOnKy ev Tdi TpvtTaveiwt, Snwooia BiBrArtobyKy and BuBrv.oOyKy 
éyxtnoewv. Cf. Mitteis, Chrestomathie, 188; Grundzige, 78 ff. 


[ 245 ] 


Atta Hi 
\3 yony Bia POT Te 
Ve nee YeaGg: Ay saikesen an 
he OENEY Qa 3% ie ‘ony. walt . 
a win * in} Ak bo iaial ee Roshi tt aa 
rial: fe Weer hala ch iy tit es ft 


+ EN is 
THC RL airs 


TT bh “1; 
aye) aay 
Ty 


yay a vithud 


na 
ij 


i igs, Lev bit 


re dvs 


‘ 
, by 7 


9 
ist 
2. Drv ls 


& 
TF 


A tide a payor , The & ; 
Rinker eran drt les ff. | ih nk boi eS) y dhe iy ie 
hey Lal bi GV oXee aie irae 





PART II 


Po dVEUNGT GC. Py AST DO .GaU IVC AING is oem LIN 
GREEK @*LATING FROM ITPALY 
AND THE PROVINCES 


SIGLA 


LATIN INSCRIPTIONS: 


Italics indicate the restoration of a lacuna, or 
minor corrections in the text. 


< > indicate ancient interpolations in the text. 
(_ ).indicate the expansion of an abbreviation. 


GREEK INSCRIPTIONS: 
[  ] indicate the restoration of a lacuna. 
< > Indicate an erasure by the editor. 


( ) indicate the expansion of an abbreviation or 
an addition by the editor. 


GREEK PAPYRI: 
[  ] indicate the restoration of a lacuna. 
[[ ]] indicate an erasure by the scribe. 
<<>> Indicate an erasure by the editor. 
< > indicate additions by the editor. 
(_) indicate the expansion of an abbreviation. 


[ 248 ] 


I. MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK 
AND LATIN FROM ITALY AND THE 
PROVINCES 


I. EPISTULA FLAMININI AD CHYRETIENSES 
(196-194 a. Chr.) 


Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 13 IG. 1x, 2, 338; Ditt. Sy//.3 593; 
CIGH 770. 


Tiros Koivetios, crparnyos Urratos ‘Pwpaiwy, Xupetiéwv | Tots 
Tayots Kal THe mode yaipew. ‘Eset Kal év Tols Nowtrols Tracuv | 
pavepav werronkapev THY Te Olav Kal TOV Shou TOD Pwpaiar | 
Tpoaipecty hv éxomuev els UMaS ONOTKEPHS, BeBovrAnpeba Kai || év 
Tois é&hs émidetEas Kata Trav wépos TpoeaTynKOTes | Tov évdd£ov, 
iva pnd év tovTows éxwow Huds Kkata|Nadely of ovK ard TOD 
Bertictou eiwOotes avalatpépecOar. “Ocat yap morte amroXei- 
Tovrar KTHoes | eyyerot Kal oixiat TOY KaOnKoVaC@Y Eis TO 
dnpoctov || TO ‘Pwpyaiwy, rdcas Sidopev THe bueTépat ToOXeL, | 
OTWS Kat év TOUTOLs UaOnTE THY KadoKayaliavy Hua | Kal STE 
Tehews €v ovOevi hirapyupha|[a|e BeBovrAnuea, | mepl wreicrov 
ToLovpevot YapiTa Kal pirodokiav.” Ocos pév| Tot wn KeKopiguévot 
elalvy TaV émtBaddOvT@y avTots, || éav buds didaEwow Kal 
paivavTat evyvamova ré|yovTes, cTOXaCoMévMV UuoY eK THY 
um éuod yeypap|uévor éyxpicewy, kpivw diKxatov elvat atroKa- 
iotac|Oae adrtois. | *Eppwcbe. 

From Chyretiae. This is the earliest document from inscriptional 
sources which deals with the relations of Rome and the Greek states. 
For this reason we have included it here, although Greece was not 
subject to Rome at this time. The Aetolians as allies of Rome had 
captured and sacked the city of Chyretiae in 200 B.c. (Livy, 31.41. 5). 
The property of the partisans of Philip in the city after the battle 
of Cynoscephalae was confiscated, and became part of the public 
property of Rome. When war with Antiochus threatened, Flamin- 
inus instituted a milder policy towards the Greek cities. Accordingly 
he restored to the Chyretiaeans all lands confiscated from their 


[ 249 ] 


Io 


I5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


citizens still held by the Roman state. The restoration was made 
to the city with the right of reinstating the former owners if they 
satisfied the magistrates of the justice of their claim. While the 
tone of the letter is that of one desirous of securing the goodwill of 
the Greeks, the terms laid down for the restoration of the land to 
the former owners indicate the attitude of a master towards a 
subject people. It is also evident that, in settling the affairs of 
Chyretiae after the war with Philip, Flamininus favored the pro- 
Roman parties in the state (cf. pp. 69 ff; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. 
Kol. 286). 


2. DECRETUM PROCONSULIS HISPANIAE ULTERIORIS 
(189 a. Chr.) 


CIL. 11, 5041; Dessau, 15; Bruns, 70; Riccobono, p. 248. 


L. Aimilius L. f. inpeirator decreivit, | utei quei Hastensium 
servel | in turri Lascutana habitarent, | leiberei essent; agrum 
5 oppidumqu., || quod ea tempestate posedisent, | item possidere 
habereque | iousit, dum poplus senatusque | Romanus vellet. Act. 
in castreis | a. d. x11 k. Febr. 


A bronze tablet found in 1866 on the probable site of Lascuta 
in Spain, now in the Louvre. Paullus probably received the title 
of imperator, which he bears in this inscription, in consequence of 
his victory over the Lusitani in 190 B.c. (cf. Livy, 37. 57. 5). Since 
he probably left Spain in the autumn of 189 B.c., and since this 
decree is dated Jan. 19, the date of the inscription is probably 
189 B.c. The people of the turris Lascutana were made free in 
the sense that they were taken from under the control of the 
Hastenses. Control of them was now transferred to the Romans. 
There are no cases known of attributi attached to communities 
which were not autonomous; cf. Mommsen, S¢. R. 3, 766. The 
Lascutani do not acquire full right of ownership to their land, but 
hold it at the pleasure of the Roman people and senate; cf. Momm- 
sen, St. R. 3, xvi, n. 13 Karlowa, 1, 447. The order of the 
words poplus senatusque, as opposed to the imperial order, senatus 
populusque, is significant. 


[ 250 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


3. EPISTULA SPURI POSTUMI, PRAETORIS, 
AD DELPHOS 


(189 a. Chr.) 


Ditt. Sy//.3 612; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 10. 


w+2+-.0ug Kal...|...[mepl THs morews eAEvVOepilas Kai Tod 
iepo[d dovAias... | 

(vacant versus duo) 

, , Le fe \ ¢e / lal 

Zmoptos Uoaropysos Aeviov vids, otpatnyos Popaiwr, Tar 

n A A / e > ig la] > / 
koilvar tov Aertdov yaipev. Oi tap vey amootanéertes 
mperBev||tat BovrAwv, OpacuvcrAjs, Opéotas mepi THs acvdias 
ToD lepov Kali THs TOAEwS Siedéynoay PiroTipias ovOev édrei- 
movres| | Kal mept THs eXevOepias Kai averogopias nEiovy, brws 

> / V5 A te ef / ans, 2 , An A 
al vTOvopot Kal aTerEts Bow TE TOALS Kal n Yopa TOV Aerdor |. | 
Tuvackerte ody Sedoypévov THL TVYKANT@L, TO TE Lepov To[D “AmoA- 
Awvos Kal THY TOALY AovAoY elvat, avecapopnrov Sé Kab] || THY 

y al A \ \ , \ \ \ > / 
Tomy Tav AeAdhov Kal THY yopay, Kal O[ta TavT os avTovo[ uous 

of \ / > / ey \ 
elvat TOUS ToATaS..........-€dAEVOEpous Gy||Tas Kal Trod- 
Tevovtas avtovs Kal’ avtlovs. .xal] kuplevolyras....TO Te fepov 
Kal TO Té]|wevos, KaO@s matpLov avTots e€ apxys [omIipyev: val 
5 ” , e a b] / 
ovp elo| nTe, oTéAAOMEV Upiv avTiypadgor |. 

(vacant versus duo) 

IIpo spepav teccdpwv vovav Mailwv Sropios Uooropios 
Aevxiou vids, otparnyos év Kometiwt(?) cuve]|Bovrevcato Tht 
auykAnta.? ypadlopévar traphnoay o Seiva Tov Seivos. .., 0 Seiva 
Tov deivos... ],| Paios ’Ativuos Vatov, TeBépsols KrXavdios...... 
mept wv Aeddol Aoyous éroinaavTo, Trept tepov|| AavAOv, TOAECWS 
édevOepilas, ywopas dvevohopytov Kal avTovoyov, Tept TovTOV 

a) / A 4 \ / al a 
Tov Tpayuwatos ovTas| || do£ev> Kalas mpotepolv AcrAdols tavta 
e nA x / > / » / A / 
vanpyev xkai Maviwr “Axirtwr édofe, TovTws TOL KpipaTt 
€upeé ||very edo€ev. 

(vacant versus duo) 

[A ]evxcos Dovpios Alevxiov vios, atpatnyos.... | 

[Ac]Adav €[AevOepias... . 2] 


From Delphi. After the Aetolian domination was ended the 
Romans displayed great kindness to the Delphians. We publish one 


[ 251 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


of a series of documents which bear upon the relations of Rome and 
Delphi (Ditt. Sy//.3 607-615, 821, 822, 825-827). 

In settling the affairs of Delphi Manius Acilius defined the 
limits of the territorium, a settlement which was later a subject of 
dispute (Tod, International Arbitration, nos. 23, 26). He also con- 
fiscated the lands of Aetolians and Locrians resident in this area 
and gave them to the city and to the temple (Ditt. Sy//.3 610). The 
Delphians had difficulty in dispossessing the owners and appealed 
to Rome. The ambassadors were slain on their return journey, and 
a new embassy was sent to complain of the outrage and to secure 
a copy of the senatorial action on their former request. ‘Che answer 
of the senate is given in the letter of the consul (Ditt. Sy//.3 611). 
‘The Delphians are permitted to expel those aliens whom they 
choose, and may allow others to remain who are amenable to the 
laws. It is evident that the Delphians were afraid of the vengeance 
of the Aetolians for the expulsion of their fellow-citizens, and 
desired the support of Rome before taking action. When the war 
was ended the Delphians sent another embassy to Rome to secure 
the confirmation of the acts of Manius.’ The document which is 
published above contains the record of the proceedings. At least 
four inscriptions were recorded on the stone. Of the first, only 
the last two lines are preserved, but it probably contained the plea 
of the ambassadors. The second is a letter of the praetor to the 
Delphians giving a summary of the decree of the senate and 
enclosing a copy which is recorded in the third document. The 
right of asylum is acknowledged; the city is granted freedom and 
immunity from tribute; the citizens are to be autonomous for all 
time and left in the enjoyment of their own laws. The subject of 
the fourth document is unknown. Compare the letter of the 
praetor Valerius to the Teians (Ditt. Sy//.2 601), where the Romans 
promise immunity from taxation although there is as yet no question 
of ‘Teos being subject to Rome. 


[ 252 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


4. EPISTULA CONSULIS AD HERACLEOTAS 
(ca. 189-188 a. Chr.) 


CIG. 3800; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 3; Ditt. Sy//.3 618; Rev. 
ét. an. 19 (1917), 237 ff. 

[Peter etsaapsrcicretiie ietatat ]otpatnyos Umraros ‘Pwpator | [Kal 
Sypapyoe kal 7 avyKAntlos ‘Hpaxrewrav the Bovdhe kal ToL 
67|[ wor yaipe]. “Evéltvyov] juty ot trap’ buav mpéoBes Aras, 
Avs, Acovd|[ovos,.... jufav]dpos, [Ev ]dnwos, Mooyos, Apiotei- 
dns, Mévns, dvdpes xal|[Aol xayabot], of to Te [Wydliopa 
améb@xay Kal avtot Sueherynoav akorov|[Ows toils év Tale 
Wen |dbicpare KAT aKexmpta wevors ovdev ehreiTrovTes |[@eroTe]uias- 
nplet|s dé ™pos mavtas tovs “EXAnvas edvows Staeiper[or | 
Tuyxd|vomey Kai TeipacducOa, TapayeyovoTay vua@y Eis THY 
nuetépalu | miote]u, mpovorav Trovetobar THhv evdexomévny, dei 
Tivos ayabod trapalil|tvoe yer ]owevoe’ cvyywpodper Sé buiv THv 
te édevOepiay Kabore cat | [Tals d]ANaus TOdEoL, Boat Huiv THY 
émitpotny édwxayv, éyovow tld | avtods malyTa Ta avTou 
ToduTever Oat KaTa TOUS DpmeTépous vopous, | [Kal év Tlots aAXous 
Tetpacoucla evypnatovrTes Duty aet Tivos ayabod | [rapaiT cox 
yiveoOar* amrodexoucOa Sé Kai TA Tap bwap dirdvOpwTa Kal 
ras || [wiores, clat adrol dé metpacopeba pundevos Aeltrec Oar ey 
ydpitos atrodoce | [amectad|\Kapev Sé€ mpos vas AevKcov 
"OpBvov tov émipednodopevov ths | [1oAews x]Jalt] THs yopas 
OTws pnodels Vas TapevoxAH.. "EppwoGe. 

From Heraclea at Latmus. We have adopted the readings of 
Holleaux (Rev. ét. an. 19 (1917), 237 ff.). The period is evidently 
the first invasion of Asia Minor by the Romans in the war against 
Antiochus. The Heracleans hastened to join the Romans and 
apparently sent an embassy to Rome to secure the ratification of the 
promises made by the commander of the Roman forces in the field. 
The consul at Rome promises the embassy that their state shall have 
its freedom and the right to use its own laws. Henzen (Ann. Inst. 
1852, 138) restored the name of Gnaeus Manlius Volso in the 
first line and assumed that this was a letter issued by him as proconsul 
in 188 B.c., when he had been sent out at the head of a commission 
of ten to settle the affairs of Asia. Holleaux shows conclusively that 
this restoration and interpretation is incorrect. 


Ape zwei 


15 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


35 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


5. SENATUS CONSULTA DE THISBENSIBUS 
(170 a. Chr.) 


Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 11; Bruns, 37; IG. vit, 2225; Ditt. 
Sy/1.3 64.6; Riccobono, p. 199. 

Kéivros Maimos Titov vidos otpatnyos THe cvvKAH|TwL cUVeE- 

Vo 5 / AD fal e A > a b] / 
Bovretcato év Kometiot Tpo nuEp|[@lvérra eldvav OxtopuBpior. 
A > 

Tpadopévar| raphaoav Mavios Axidsos Maviov vids OAre[«||vi Ja, 
Tiros Nowiowos Titov vidos. Uept dv Gial|[B]ets Adryous érroun- 
cavto Tept Tov Kal ad|[T]ovs mpaypydrar, ottives év The didcar 

a ¢€ Vd peed 4 ¢€ lal a @ ¥ > 
The | hperépac évémervar, draws avtois do0acw, | [olis ta Kal 
avtTovs mpaynata éEnynowvrTat: twepl Tod||Tov Tov Tpayp"aTos 
otws édo&ev: Srrws Koivros | Maivos orparnyos trav é« Tihs 
auverntou | [wlévte atrordEni, of av avtar é€x TaV Snuocior 

/ \ a ANG / f BY 

wpa|[yuldtav cal Ths idias wictews hatvwrvrar é0€e. | IIpotépat 
eldvav OxtopuBpiov: ypadopuévwr traph||cav Ildomdcos Movtos 
Koivrovu vios, Mdapxos KrXad| dos Madpxovu vids, Mavios Sépysos 
Maviov vids. | “Qcavtws tepi dv of avtol Adyous éroimocavTo 
mept yopas | [xlal epi ALlpévwv Kai Tpocddwy Kal Tepi dpéwv: 
& avtav éye|[yloveccayv, tadta nuay plély evexev éyew é&eivar 
&£o||Eev.—Ilepi apyov kal rept iepov Kai Tpocddav Tras avToi | 
[xluptedwor, Tept TOUTOU TOU TpdypuaTos OUTwS EdoEEv: | olTeves 
? \ , \ ¢€ , \ la) X fv / \ 
eis THY pidtav THY uetépay po Tov } Tdios Aoxpé|ttos To 
otpaToTredov Tpos THY TOW BicRas mpoonyalyev, dws ovTOL 
” / \ + rd wv \ / 
érn Séxa tla] éyysota Kupievwow. “Kédo€glev]. || Ilept yopas, 
oiKiay Kal THY UTapXOVT@Y avToOis* ov TroTé| TL a’TAY yéyover, 
ef \ e a > lal ” Sea x ¢ , \ @ 
étras [Ta] éavtadv adtois Exew e&ju | E0Eev. ‘Acatvtas rept wv 

€ 3 \ / > Ve va ¢ 3 Uf deed > a 
of avTol Aoyous errouncavTo, GTra[s] | of avToOporos of id.0L exe? 
huyades Ovtes, THY akpav avTois Oras | Tevyioas €EHt Kat éxel 
KATOLK@OLY OUTOL, KaDOTL évehadvicay, ov||Tws EdoEEv* Straws exer 

a A \ / 

KATOLKOOLW Kal TOUTO TerXiowoty. "Kdo|Eev.—T Hv rorduv Tevyioas 

b] BA € / \ e e i] \ f b] 4 
ov éd0€ev. ‘Oca’tws mepl by of avtol | Adyous érroincayTo, 
ypuaiov, 6 cuvnveyxav eis otépavor, 6|mws eis TO Kamretodcov 
atéhavov KatacKevacwcw, TovTos, Kab|[oTt] evepavicay, Tas 

> al b] ma a \ / ? \ , 
avtots amro600n, 6[1@|s TovTov Tov ctépavor «is || [To] Kazrero- 
Mov KaTacKevdowolv ovTws aTrododvaL edogev. ‘Ocad|[T]os 
Tept @Y ol avTOL NOYouS ErroLncaVTO, avOpwrrous, oiTLVES UTeE- 


P3543] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


va[v| tila rots Snwoctows mpaypwace Tots HueTépots Kal TOls EavTOV 
eau, | [6ar]ws ovToL KaTéX@VTaL* Tepl TOUTOU TOU TpdypyaTos, 
\ BAN oh ys a > A / 
Kabas av Koiv|[ro|s Mawiws otparnya. éx Tav Snpoociwv 
Tpaypatwv Kal THs idtas ri||[o]rews S0x7, obTws Trotety dokev. 
—Oitives eis ddXas TONES al7HAdAOoGaY Kal ovyl mpds TOY Tap’ 
HOY oTpaTHYOV TrapeyévoyTo, STrws | pun Els TAELY KaTATTOPEvwD- 
Tau’ wepl TovTOV Tov mpayuaTtos mpos AvAov | ['O]oriAcov 
vratov ypdupata atootetNas edokev, OTws Tepl TovTOV Tht 
8:|[av ]lotar mpocéyni, Kabas dv atta. éx tav Snpwociwy Tpay- 
/ \ fol *Q7 / / ” ¢ / 
patev Kat || [T]hs tdvas mictews haivntas. "Kdokev. | “Ocattas 
Tepl WY of avTOL AOYous ETroincavTo Tep[t | T]av Suc@v Hevore- 
Gidos Kal Mvaci6os, d7rws €« Xadkidos apeOaar, | kat Aawoxpita 
Avovuaiouv éy OnBav: tavtas éx TovtTwy Tév Tore|wv adeivat 
édo£ev, cal Orrws eis Dic Bas wn KaTéenOwow. ”Kdbo€er. ||['O]oavtas 
Tepl ov TavTas Tas yuvaikas Ddpias adv apyvpials | ei|s Tov 
oTpaTnyov évevKeiy eltracay’ epi TovTov Tod mpdy[ualTo|s 
votepov évavte L'atov Aoxpetiou Bovrevoacbar éeboéev. | 
—Ocavtos trepi dv ot avtot Ora Beis evepavicar Tepi citouv Kai 
ér[al]|ov éavtois Kowvwviav mpos Tvatoyv Uavdecivoy yeyovévar: 
\ / A “4 x DS) a / 
mept Tov||[T]ov Tov mpayuwatos Kav Kpitas KaPelv BovrwvTat, 
/ \ a 7 AQ) , \ ® e > \ 
rovtos Kpitas So[d]|vat edofev.— Qcavtas trepi dv ot avtol 
Adyous érroujcavTo wept Tov | ypaupata Sovva OicBedow eis 
AitaXlav cat Bwxida: rept TovTou | Tod mpayuwatos Oia Bedor 
kal Kopwvetow eis Aitodiav cai Poxi|da Kat édy Tov eis das 
movers BovrAwvTat, ypaupata pirdv||Opw7ra Sodvar eo€er. 


From Thisbe. In the Macedonian war Thisbe, Haliartus, and 
Coronea remained loyal to Perseus, driving out the Roman party 
in their cities. When C. Lucretius advanced against Thisbe, it sur- 
rendered without a contest. “he Roman praetor restored the city 
to the partisans of Rome, who were recalled from exile, and the 
Macedonian supporters remaining in the city when it surrendered 
were sold into slavery (Livy, 42. 46, 63, where Mommsen reads 
Thisbas instead of Thebas in both chapters). The pro-Roman party 
in control of the city sent an embassy to Rome for the settlement 
of problems which had not been adjusted by the praetor. The 
public lands, revenues, harbor, and mountains, which had appa- 
rently been confiscated, were restored to the city. For the next ten 


Bits d 


40 


45 


50 


55 


60 


IO 


T5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


years, only those citizens who had been friendly to Rome before 
Lucretius captured the city were eligible for magistracies, or priest- 
hoods, or as treasurers of the public revenues. In view of the fact 
that there was danger of the anti-Roman party returning and driving 
out the supporters of Rome, the latter asked permission to fortify 
the citadel and dwell there. This request was granted, but the 
Romans refused permission to rebuild the walls of the city, probably 
with an eye to possible future complications. ‘The Roman party 
was small and weak, and there was danger of their being driven 
out. The senate instructed Quintus Manius to take necessary steps 
to prevent an uprising on the part of residents of ‘Chisbe whose 
loyalty was suspected. ‘he direct request of the ambassadors to 
imprison these men was refused. The consul, Aulus Hostilius, then 
in Macedonia, was ordered to take such action as he deemed ad- 
visable about the return of the exiles. The senate probably left 
these questions 1n abeyance intentionally in order to have a reason- 
able ground for interference in the affairs of “Vhisbe at any time. 
The senate thereby definitely abandoned the policies of Flamininus 
in his first settlement of the affairs of Greece. It is interesting to 
note that the Italian trader had soon penetrated Greece after the 
first invasion by Roman troops. Gnaeus Pandosinus, a native of 
Pandosia in southern Italy, had leased a part of the public lands of 
‘Thisbe, paying a certain percentage of the yield in grain and oil 
to the municipal treasury as rental. here arose some dispute in 
connection with this contract, which the senate referred to arbiters. 


6. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE DELO 
| (164 a. Chr.) 

Ditt. Sy/2.3 664. 

Ol otpatnyoi Xappides éripednn| tet Anrov xatpew. Vevouéver| 
TrELoVwY Noywv ev Tet Bourel | Trepl TOD SoypaTos ov Hvey«ey || 
éx “Popns Anuntpsos ‘Pnvarleds trép TH Kata TO Yaparr.|eiov: 
éd0€ev un Kwdvew av|rov avoiyew Kal Oepatrevey | TO lepov 
KaOamep Kal tpote||pov, ypawat 6é Kal mpos oe melpt TovTwv 
iva el6ns* vrote|tTdyapev S€ cot Kai Tod éve|yOévTos UT’ avdTod 
ddypatos | TO avtiypadoy.|| 

Koivtos Muvuxios Koivrou | vids otparnyds tet cvyxkdn|Tor 


[ 256 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


auveBovretaato év Ko|eTiws eidusois évtepK(a)ral[p |ious* ypa- 
douévov maphnaav || Ildmdvos Lopxvos Ilordiov, Te|Bépsos 20 
Kravdios TeBepiou | Kpvoropivas, Mdvios Bovty|tos Taiov: 
mept ov Anuntptos | ‘Pnvatos Adyous érrouncaro, || dws TO év 25 
Anrqwt tepov Lapalmidos adtar Ocparrevery €| Fei, Andlovs dé Kw- 
Avewv Kal | Tov €E "AOnvadv érapyov | mapaytwvopevov wt EXac||coV 30 
Jeparrever* tepl tovrou | Tod mpaypuatos oUTws ébo|Eev: Kalas 
TO mpoTepov €|Pepdrrevev, Evexev Huav | Oeparrevery EEeoTLv TOD || 35 
un TL UTrevayTiov THL THS | TUyKAHTOV Soypate yivntar. | "EdoEev. 
From Delos. Although Delos at this time was under the ad- 
ministration of Athens, and the latter was a free city allied with 
Rome, the senate did not hesitate to interfere in the internal 
government of the island. Demetrius appealed to Rome to permit 
the opening of the Serapeum on Delos and the renewal of the cult 
which the Athenians had forbidden. He secured a decree of the 
senate in his favor, and, armed with this, he came to Athens and 
presented it to the senate. It is apparent from the wording of the 
letter which the Athenians sent to the governor of Delos that 
considerable opposition had arisen in Athens over this decree which 
is extremely brusque and softened by no diplomatic amenities. It 
is not even addressed to the Athenians nor is any request made to 
them to respect the wishes of Rome. Contrast with this the letter 


of Flamininus (no. 1). For the date of this document cf. note by 
Hiller, Ditt. Sy//.3 664. 


7. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE TIBURTIBUS 
(ca. 159 a. Chr.) 


CIL. 1, 201 = x1v, 3584; Dessau, 19; Bruns, 39; Riccobono, 
p. 204. 

Cornelius Cn. f. pr(aetor) sen(atum) cons(uluit) a. d. 11 nonas 
Maias sub aede Kastorus. | Scr. adf. A. Manlius A. f., Sex. Iulius 
.. +) L. Postumius S. f. | 

Quod ‘Teiburtes v(erba) f(ecistis) quibusque de rebus vos pur- 
gavistis, ea senatus | animum advortit ita utei aequom fuit—nosque 
ea ita audiveramus, || ut vos deixsistis vobeis nontiata esse—: ea nos 5 
animum nostrum | non indoucebamus ita facta esse, propterea quod 


AMA Pos7s 4 17 


IO 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


scibamus, | ea vos merito nostro facere non potuisse, neque vos 
dignos esse | quei ea faceretis, neque id vobeis neque rei poplicae 
vostrae | oitile esse facere; et postquam vostra verba senatus audivit, || 
tanto magis animum nostrum indoucimus, ita utei ante | arbitra- 
bamur, de eieis rebus af vobeis peccatum non esse. | Quonque de 
eieis rebus senatuei purgati estis, credimus vosque | animum vos- 
trum indoucere oportet, item vos populo | Romano purgatos fore. 


Bronze tablet found at Tibur in the sixteenth century, now lost. 
The use of the second person in the verbs shows that this document 
is a letter from the praetor, containing the substance of a senatus 
consultum. Itisin the form ofa statement first made to the Tiburtine 
deputies in the senate. For the conventional form of a S.C., ef. 
Abbott, 230, 413 ff. he date is fixed by the fact that L. Cornelius 
Lentulus Lupus, who was consul in 156 B.c., held the praetorship 
in 160 or 159 B.c. (cf. Miinzer, R.F. 4, 1386 f.). For confirmation 
of this date, cf. also Willems, Le sénat de la république rom. 1, 2.50 f. 
Tibur had belonged to the old Latin League. It was at this time 
a civitas foederata, being one of the soci Latini nominis. Whether or 
not it was under the aeguum foedus of Sp. Cassius is not clear (cf. 
Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 47, n. 3). It became a munictpium by the 
legislation of 90 B.c. A not uncommon cause of complaint against 
Italian cities was their failure to furnish the required contingent 
of troops (cf. Willems, op. cit. 2, 692). What the question at issue 
in this case was we do not know, but the point of interest in the 
document is that Tibur’s explanation of the incident is laid before 
the senate, probably by a legation (cf. guod Tetburtes verba fecistis), 
and that the senate speaks for the Roman people and communicates 
its decision through its presiding officer. 


8. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE NARTHACIENSIBUS 
ET MELITAEENSIBUS 


(159-147 a. Chr.) 
IG. 1x, 2, 89; Ditt. Sy//3 674; de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pub- 
blico, 8; Vod, xxx1v; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 12. 
[{rpat layéovtos tOv Ococarav Acovto[s | Tod “Ay |noiaaov 
Aapuoaiou, év 6€ NapOaxia[e | apxovt wv Kpitwvos rod’ Apevia, 
Ilorv«réos | [tod Pec |Siarmov, Traveéta Tod Ayeddov, av[ell- 


25a 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


ypadn To] ddypa TO yevomevov Ud auyK[Ay| TOV él c]TpaTHYyoD 5 


Tov Oercarav Oecca|[Aod Tod] Opacupndeos Depaiov. | [T dios 
‘Oc]rituos At’dov vids Maryxivos otpal[tnyos thie cvyxrAnrar 
auveBovrevoato mTpol||[....va]vav Koivtirt@v éy Kopetior: 
ypado|[uévar mlaphoav Koivtos (&)tatirunvos Koivrov | [vids 
Kop |ynria, Cvatos Aorarvos C'vaiov viols |’A....nv]on, Adros 
Lewmpwvios Airov vids Pal[Aépva]. Hepl dv Oeacadol Medu- 
Tavels “Appol|[Eevos Av]odvdpov, Aaumpopayos Ionita | [ape- 
aBev|ral Aoyous érroincavto, avdpes Kal[Aol Kaya ]Ool Kai hirou 
mapa OyHwouv Karov | [xayabo]d nai dirov cuppdxov (Te), 
ydpita | [pirtav oluppayiav te dvevedoavTo, Te||[pi yopas | 
Snuwooias Kat mepl ywpiov épyuov | [elrracay], we? Hs yw@pas 
els THU pirtay Tod | [nwov Tod “Pwyaiwy mapeyévovto, iy 
yo|[pav Nap@a|xceis wera Tatra éavToy adicas | [érouncayt jo, 
Tept TOUTOV TOU TpaymaTos Sires || [THY dsdvos lav 1poc(c)xwour, 
dT ws TODTO TO TPa|[yua aKépa |tov avTois aToKaTacTay ovT | 
[xaOe@s mporepoly éri Mnoeiws cai emt Oeccadav |.......... 
Kat émt Tov tept LIvAXov Maxe|[Sovwv Kexps|uévov avtois jv, 
TavTd te Ta k[pi||uata Kupia avTot|s n° Tept TovTOV Tov Tpa- 
yual[ros avvevddx |ncev nuiv cal NapOaxtedow | [bares tov 


ayav la Tov Twapovta Kpivn éw M[ers|Telac...... ély TavTnt THe 
Yopale......|..audotépwv] Tov Show é[reTpetrovTar] || .. 
€oTiv wr pa..|..1n..val. Kal mept dv Beccarol | NapGaxceis 
IN Tok roe Lali | vi. << , pea Be |utat Noyo[ vs | érr[oujoavto Kata 





mpoowrov év Thu] cuyxAntl@L..avdpes Karol || KayalOol Kai 
girot rapa Sypou Kxa[rod Kal|ya0od cali Pidlou cuppdyou Te 
nuetépov, xalpita pirjiav oulplualyiav te avevedoayto Kat | 
Tept TOV Tpayluataly Tov Kal avbTovs Sieré|y|ncalv] epi 
xepas [at] [e]p[av wept rH]s Te || ab[y]pn[mevns] z[is Kara 
Menir Ja[cléas apis [Na]p|@axcelw]v [trav] ev r[H Axar|iale- 
Kai yap| wera talvrns] | [4 ]s y@pas ets tHlv d]crca[v] z[od 
Sy ]uov [rod ‘Polwlaiwoly] Nap@axets rapayleyovéev ja, [x Jai 
[7 lept | THs x@pas Kat [Tov] tep@v KpeTnpio.s [vev |ixnx[é]||\vac 
KaTa vouovs Tos MecccalA@]y, ots [vo]|wors ews talv]dv ypav- 
[r]at, ods vopuous Tiros | Koiyxrios brratos amo ths Tav déxa 
mpea|Revtav yvouns eaxev, Kal Kata Soypa | cuyKAHTOU, TeEpt 
Te TOUTMY TaYV T[playual|[Tw |v eres avwTepoy Tpitw él TpLaY 


Reso 17-2 


Io 


30 


=), 


60 


65 


79O 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Sixac|[tn]piov vevixneévas, él Lapiwr, Koro[d]or[t|av, | 
Mayvyjrwv, xex[ ps ]uéva eivat cata vopuor[s], | 6rws Tabra Kupia 
4 otTws Kabds Kal Grdots | yeyovds éeotivs Tepl ToUTOU TOD 
mpdypatos || otrws édofev: ydpita didiav cvppayiar | [a]va- 
veooac bat rovtois Te HriavOpwrras a|toKpLOnvat, dvdpas Kadovs 
xayabovs mpoc|ayopedaat, doa Kexpiméva eotly Kata vomovs | 
ods Tiros Koiyetios trratos &axev, tadta Kal\O@s Kexpiméva 
éotiy otw Soxet xvpia elvat Seiv: | ToUTO Te wn EvXEpES Elva, 
Soa Kata vomous Ke|Kptéva éotly dKkvpa Trovety. Eévid Te 
éxatépors Tdilos “Ootidtos otpatnyos tov Ttapiay Sdodvar 
xe|[Alevon ard onoTteptiwv vowwv éxaTov elxocr || [7é]vTE Ets 
éxdotny wpecBelav, ovTw Kabas av | [adtar éx] Tov Snuociwy 
mpayudrwv micte|[os Te THS] (dias haivntas. "Edokev. 

This inscription is engraved on two sides of a stone found at 
Narthacium in Thessaly. It is probably earlier than 146 B.c., since 
no reference is found in it to the provincial organization of Achaea 
by Mummius and his commission of ten in that year (cf. Willems, 
Le sénat de la république rom. 2, 705, n. 3; de Ruggiero, op. cit. 254), 
and because the two peoples in the controversy are spoken of as 
friends and allies of the Roman people—terms which would hardly 
be applied to provincial cities. On the other hand the fact that 
Hostilius, the praetor who presided over the senate, was not consul 
until 137 B.c. prevents us from dating the inscription much earlier 
than 150 B.c. 

‘The inscription records the settlement of a dispute between the 
cities of Melitaea and Narthacium by the Roman senate. The 
Melitaeans claimed that they owned the territory in question when 
they were admitted into the friendship of Rome and that the land 
had been awarded to them by arbitration in previous decisions. The 
ambassadors of Narthacium claimed that the land had been awarded 
to them by Titus Quinctius and that his action had been ratified 
by a decree of the senate. Furthermore, the dispute had been 
arbitrated recently bya mixed tribunal from Samos, Colophon, and 
Magnesia, which had given a decision in their favor. The senate 
decided in favor of Narthacium, thus confirming the arrangement 
of Flamininus. In the same way, in deciding a similar question at 
issue between Priene and Samos, the senate upheld the arrangements 


[26074] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


made by Manlius and the senatorial commission (Ditt. Sy//.3 688), 
which had been confirmed by a judicial decision rendered by the 
Rhodians acting as arbiters. Cf. pp. 153 ff- 


g. EPISTULA Q. FABI MAXIMI AD DYMAEOS 
(ca. 139 a. Chr.) 


Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 4; CIG. 1543; Ditt. Sy//.3 684. 


"Et Oeoxorov A€wvos, ypappatélos Tod cuvedpiov Ytpato- 
Kréos. | Kéivtros PaBios Kolvrov Mdgiuos, avOdtrartos ‘Pwopaior, 
Avpailwv tots dpyoves Kal cvvédpors Kal The ores Yaipew. 
Tév rept || KuAXaviov cuvédpwrv éudavicdvtwy jot tepit TOV 
ouvTere|cbévtwy map wiv adiknudtav, rAéyo 6b brép Tis 
éumpnoe|ws kal P9opas TOV apy(el)wv Kat TOV Snuociwy ypap- 
pdtov, av éyelyoves apynyos THS 6AnS cuvyyUTEws Hoos 
Tavpopéveos 6 | Kat Tovs vomous ypdas trevavtiovs The 
atrobobetane Tois || TA]yasots bd ‘Papaiwy rortt[eta]s, Trept 
Gv Ta Kata pépos Sun[r]O[o| wev ev Ild]rpacs peta tod tral[p jov- 
[ro]s cupBovrtov: érrel ody ot Stamrpa|[ Ed |wevor tabra ébaivovTo 
pot THS Yeupiotns Kaltac |rdcews | [Ka]l Tapayhs xaltacKevny] 
Totovpevolt tots “EXAnot waa|w* od pol[vov yap] TAs mplos 
a|AAnrou[s] acvvard[a ]E[tas] Kai ype[l@xorrias oi||Keta], aAXra 
cai [rt ]hs aroSeSouévns Kata [x louvov rots EAA[ now é]|NevOeplas 
GaAXOTpLa Kat THls] Hwere[pa]s mpoatpécews, éyl@, Ta]|pacyxo- 
pévov TOV KaTnyOpaVv adnOiwas atrodei~ets, YO|oov pév, Tov 
yeyovota apynyov [Tt ]av mpaxyOevtwv Kal vo|woypadyjacayta éri 
Katarvoe THS aobobetons TonsTel||[a]s, Kpivas évoyoy eivas 
Pavatw. Tapeyopica, opoiws dé Kai | [Pop ]uloxov “EyeaGéveos 
Tav Samlopyov Tov cuumpdéavta | [Trois] éeumpnoace Ta apyeia 
kat Ta Onpooia ypaupata, érel Kal | [avTos] @poroynoer’ 
Tipodeov 5¢ Nuxia toy peta Tod Loaov | [yeyove |ra vouoypador, 
érrel EXacoov Epaiveto HOLKNKAS, €||[ KEXeVeA | Tpoayety eis‘ Pawunr, 
opkiaas ep [@]e THe vouunvias Tod év|[drov unvod|s éora[c] éxe?, 
Kal éudavioas tL ae er |i Tov Eéevwv ctparn|[yas, d7a@|s av [ur 
m |porepov érraly Jeva[ev et ]s otxov, éd[v uly ad.. 

From Dymae. Shortly after the destruction of Corinth by 
Mummius the Romans restored to the Greek cities their ancient 


i 2667} 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


T5 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


assemblies (Pausanias, 7. 16. 10), but apparently with a constitution 
modelled on oligarchical lines (ll. 9 ff). In Dymae there was a 
party led by Sosus which attempted a revolution. The public records 
were destroyed by fire, and the revolutionary party enacted laws 
contrary to the spirit of the constitution proposed by Rome. ‘The 
pro-Roman party appealed to Fabius who restored them to power 
and condemned Sosus to death together with Phormiscus who was 
one of the magistrates associated with the conspirators. “Timotheus, 
another conspirator, was banished to Rome. This document is 
important evidence for the influence of Rome in shaping the 
constitutions of the Greek cities along oligarchical lines. 


10. SENTENTIA Q. M. MINUCIORUM INTER 
GENUATES ET VITURIOS 
(117 a. Chr.) 


CIL. 1, 199 = v, 7749; Dessau, 5946; Bruns, 184. 


O. M. Minucieis QO. f. Rufeis de controvorsieis inter | Genuateis 
et Veiturios in re praesente cognoverunt, et coram inter eos con- 
trovosias composeiverunt, | et qua lege agrum possiderent et qua 
fineis fierent dixserunt. Eos fineis facere terminosque statu luse- 
runt; | ubei ea facta essent, Romam coram venire iouserunt. Romae 
coram sententiam ex senati consulto dixerunt eidib. || Decemb. L. 
Caecilio O. f. O. Muucio Q. f. cos.—Qua ager privatus casteli 
Vituriorum est, quem agrum eos vendere heredemque | sequi licet, 
is ager vectigal. nei siet—-Langatium fineis agri privati. Ab rivo 
infimo, qui oritur ab fontei in Mannicelo ad flovium | Edem; ibi 
terminus stat. Inde flovio suso vorsum in fovium Lemurim. Inde 
flovio Lemuri susum usque ad rivom Comberane........ Agri 
poplici quod Langenses posident, hisce finis videntur esse. Ubi 
comfluont | Edus et Procobera, ibei terminus stat. Inde Ede flovio 
sursuorsum in montem Lemurino infumo; ibei terminus || stat. 
Inde sursumvorsum iugo recto monte Lemurino; ibei terminus 
Stat; i wists Quem agrum poplicum | iudicamus esse, eum agrum 
castelanos Langenses Veiturios poszdere fruique videtur oportere. 
Pro eo agro vectigal Langenses || Veituris in poplicum Genuam 
dent in anos singulos vic(toriatos) n(ummos) cccc. Sei Langenses 


[2620] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


eam pequniam non dabunt neque satis | facient arbitratuu Genua- 
tium, quod per Genuenses mora non fiat, quo setius eam pequniam 
acipiant: tum quod in eo agro | natum erit frumenti partem vicen- 
sumam, vini partem sextam Langenses in poplicum Genuam dare 
debento | in annos singolos.—Quei intra eos fineis agrum posedet 
Genuas aut Viturius, quei eorum posedeit k. Sextil. L. Caicilio | 
©. Muucio cos., eos ita posidere colereque liceat. Ezs, quei poside- 
bunt, vectigal Langensibus pro portione dent ita uti ceteri || Lan- 
genses, qui eorum in eo agro agrum posidebunt fruenturque. Praeter 
ea in eo agro niquis posideto nisi de maiore parte | Langensium 
Veituriorum sententia, dum ne alium intro mitat nisi Genuatem 
aut Veiturium colendi causa. Quei eorum | de maiore parte Langen- 
sium Veiturium sententia ita non parebit, is eum agrum nei habeto 
nive fruimino.—Quei | ager compascuos erit, in eo agro quo minus 
pecus pascere Genuates Veituriosque liceat ita utei in cetero agro | 
Genuati compascuo, niquis prohibeto, nive quis vim facito, neive 
prohibeto quo minus ex eo agro ligna materiamque || sumant 
utanturque.—Vectigal anni primi k. Januaris secundis Veturis 
Langenses in poplicum Genuam dare | debento. Quod ante k. 
Januar. primas Langenses fructi sunt eruntque, vectigal invitei dare 
nei debento.— | Prata quae fuerunt proxuma faenisicei L. Caecilio 
QO. Muucio cos. in agro poplico, quem Vituries Langenses | posident 
et quem Odiates et quem Dectunines et quem Cavaturineis et quem 
Mentovines posident, ea prata, | invitis Langensibus et Odiatibus 
et Dectuninebus et Cavaturines et Mentovines, quem quisque eorum 
agrum || posidebit, inviteis eis niquis sicet nive pascat nive fruatur. 
Sei Langueses aut Odiates aut Dectunines aut Cavaturines | aut 
Mentovines malent in eo agro alia prata inmittere defendere sicare, 
id uti facere liceat, dum ne ampliorem | modum pratorum habeant, 
quam proxuma aestate habuerunt fructique sunt.—Vituries quei 
controvorsias | Genuensium ob iniourias iudicati aut damnati sunt, 
sei quis in vinculeis ob eas res est, eos omneis | solvei mittei lei- 
berareique a Genuenszbus videtur oportere ante eidus Sextilis 
primas.—Seiquoi de ea re || iniquom videbitur esse, ad nos adeant 
primo quoque die et ab omnibus controversis et hono publ. li. | Leg. 
Moco Meticanio Meticoni f., Plaucus Peliani. Pelioni f. 
]. 45. et hono publ. li; something like abstineant required. 


[ 263 ] 


30 


ab, 


40 


45 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Bronze tablet found in 1506, near Genua, now in Genoa. Most 
of those parts of the inscription which describe the boundaries of 
the ager privatus (ll. 8-12) and the ager publicus (ll. 14-23) of the 
Langenses are omitted here. The document is dated in |. 5. It 
contains the settlement of a controversy between the czvitas foederata 
of Genua and the neighboring tribe of the Viturii or Langenses 
and certain other tribes (I. 38). So far as the relations of the munici- 
palities to the central government are concerned, its interest for us 
lies in the fact that it gives us the fullest account which we have in 
the republican period of the part which Rome played as arbitrator 
between dependent communities, and that it discloses the control 
which a czvitas had over its attributz. The Viturii and the other 
tribes mentioned in |. 38 were attributi of Genua (cf. Mommsen, 
St. R. 3, 765 ff; cf. pp. 138 f, and commentary on no. 49). It is 
clear that the Viturii had some form of local government, because 
they were able to receive rental from those who occupied certain 
lands (Il. 29-30), and to decide certain questions de maziore parte 
L. V. sententia (ll. 30-31, 32). They were, however, not autono- 
mous. ‘Ihe questions at issue between them and Genua have been 
heard by the local magistrates of Genua (ll. 43-44). So far as private 
rights go, the citizens may own land (¢f. Il. 5-6), but, if they occupy 
any of the ager publicus of Genua, they must pay an annual tax to 
Genua in money or in kind (ll. 24-28). 

‘The magistrates of Genua had proceeded to hear the cases which 
had arisen (Il. 43-44), but the Viturii appealed to the Roman senate. 
Such an appeal was quite in accordance with the Roman theory of 
her relation to all czvitates in her confines. They were under her 
hegemony, and consequently their dealings with one another and 
with independent states, and their relations to communities sub- 
ordinate to them, were regulated by her. As she expressed it in 
certain treaties (cf. Cic. pro Balbo, 35-37), the allied cities were 
required matestatem populi Romani comiter conservare. 

The senate in this case appointed two of its members, the Minucii, 
as arbitrators. “hey were descendants of QO. Minucius Rufus, who 
conquered the Ligurians in 197 B.c. (of. Livy, 32. 27-31; Cic. 
Brut. 73), and were probably patrons of Genua. They proceeded 
to the locality concerned (cf. |. 2), investigated the matter, made 


[ 264 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


certain rulings, set up boundary stones, ordered local deputies to 
come to Rome (ef. ll. 4, 46), and reported to the senate. Their 
decision is: (1) that the Viturii may own certain ager privatus which 
shall be free from taxes (Il. 5-6); (2) that for the ager publicus of 
Genua which they occupy, they shall pay an annual vectigal to 
Genua (Il. 24-32); (3) that the common pasture land may be used 
by any Genuan or Viturian (ll. 33-34); (4) that the meadows in 
this public land are reserved for the Viturii (Il. 37-42); (5) that the 
Viturii who have been imprisoned by the Genuan magistrates shall 
be set free (Il. 43-44), and (6) that later grievances are to be referred 
to Rome (1. 45). For arbitration under Rome, cf. pp. 152 ff, and 
nos. 8, 57, 90, etc. 


It LEX OSCA TABULAE BANTINAE 
(150-100 a. Chr.) 


Bruns, 8; Girard, p. 26; Riccobono, p. 130; Buck, Oscan and 
Umbrian Grammar, p. 230; v. Planta, Gramm. d. osk.-umbr. Dial. 


2, 599; Conway, Exempla Selecta, 2. 


STAGE L aWitive utes is .... Sl... quaestor multam proposuerit 
ety Riess lurabit maximae partis senatus sententia dummodo 
non minus xu adsint, cum ea res consulta erit. Siquis peremerit, 
prius quam peremerit, iurato sciens in comitio sine dolo malo, se ea 
comitia magis rei publicae causa quam Culuspiam gratiae aut inimi- 
citiae causa, idque se de senatus sententia maximae partis perimere. 
Cui sic comitia perimet qguisquam, is eo die comitia ne habuerit. 

Chap. 2. Quis quandoque post hac comitia, habebit magistratus 
de capite vel in pecunias, facito ut populus turati sententiam dicant, 
se de iis id sententiae dicere, quod optimum publicum censeat esse, 
neve fecerit quo quis de ea re minus iuret dolo malo. Siquis contra 
hoc fecerit aut comitia habuerit, multa tanta esto: n. MM. Et 
siquis eum potius magistratus multare volet, dumtaxat minoris partis 
pecuniae multae multare liceto. 

Chap. 3. Siquis pro magistratu alteri capitis aut pecuniae diem 
dixerit, is comitia ne habuerit nisi cum apud populum quater ora- 
verit sciens sine dolo malo et guartum diem populus perceperit. 
Quater, neque plus quinquiens, cum reo agito prius quam iudica- 


[ 265 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


tionem dabit, et cum postremum cum reo oraverit, ab eo die in 
diebus xxx proximis comitia ne habuerit. Siquis contra hoc fecerit, 
eum siquis volet magistratus multare, liceto, dumtaxat minoris partis 
pecuniae liceto. 

Chap. 4. Cum censores Bantiae populum censebunt, qui civis 
Bantinus erit, censetor ipse et pecuniam qua lege 11 censores censere 
proposuerint. At siquis in censum non venerit dolo malo, et eius 
convincitur, ipse in comitio caedatur praetoris magistratu, populo 
praesente sine dolo malo, et immercato cetera familia et pecunia 
omnino quae eius erit, quae incensa erit, publica esto. 

Chap. 5. Praetor, sive praefectus post hac Bantiae erit, siquis 
apud eos cum altero lege agere volet, aut pro iudicato manum ad- 
serere de eis rebus quae hisce in legibus scriptae sunt, ne quem 
prohibuerit plus diebus x proximis. Siquis contra hoc prohibuerit, 
multa tanta esto: n.M. Et siquis eum magistratus multare volet, 
liceto, dumtaxat minoris partis pecuniae multae multare liceto. 

Chap. 6. Praetor censor Bantiae me quzs fuerit, nisi quaestor 
fuerit, neve censor fuerit nisi praetor fuerit. Et siquis praetor et 
SIGUES CONS OTA Ss nee virum fuerit, is post ea tr. pl. ne fuerit. 
Siquis contra hoc tr. pl. factus erit, is improbe factus esto. Id magis- 
ET1UT neo y betes quandoque Bantiae......... magisterium an- 
morum VI proximorum....quod....magisterium. 

A bronze tablet, about 15 by 10 inches, found in 1790 at Bantia, 
near the borders of Lucania and Apulia, now in the museum at 
Naples. On one side it has an Oscan inscription, written in Latin 
letters, and reproduced here in the Latin translation made by 
Buecheler, as modified by Buck. On the other side is a Latin 
inscription, of a somewhat later date, with which we are not con- 
cerned here. The Oscan inscription was in two columns, of which 
the right-hand column has been lost. Of the extant left-hand 
column, the upper and lower parts are broken. Six chapters, which 
represent about one-sixth of the original law, are preserved. The 
inscription contains a series of municipal regulations for the federated 
town of Bantia. This municipal charter was either granted to Bantia 
by Roman commissioners, and is, therefore, a /ex data, or more 
probably, as Mommsen (S¢. R. 3, 701) and Girard think, was 


adopted by the local assembly. Its primary interest for us lies in 


[ 266 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


the fact that it is a fragment of the earliest extant municipal charter. 
It is also important, because it illustrates the policy of Rome in 
the second century B.c. of entering into relations with individual 
cities, rather than with tribes or large sections of country. It is also 
important as illustrating for the early period the blending of Roman 
institutions with local autonomy and traditional titles and practices. 

The law prescribes the presence of a quorum in the local senate 
when certain action is taken. It defines the functions and procedure 
of the local assembly in hearing criminal cases. It lays down certain 
provisions concerning the census, describes the jurisdiction of the 
praetor, and establishes a cursus honorum. The characteristics of 
autonomy which we notice in this law are the regularly ordered 
magistracies, senate, and popular assembly, the taking of the census 
by the local authorities, the holding of court and the imposition of 
fines by the praetor of Bantia, and the exercise of criminal juris- 
diction by the popular assembly. No mention is made of the 
exemption, even of Romans or Italians, from the jurisdiction of 
this popular court, although in most treaties probably Rome stipu- 
lated that they should not be tried by the local court (¢f Mommsen, 
St. R. 3, 702). The specification of a senatorial quorum for the 
transaction of certain business is characteristic of Roman practice 
and is found in later municipal charters. The right of zntercessio 
is exercised at Bantia, as well as at Rome, but in the former city it 
may be used to prevent a meeting of the assembly only on the 
approval of the senate, and on the taking of an oath by the official 
exercising it; cf. the oath taken by Ti. Gracchus (Aul. Gell. 6. 19). 
‘The procedure of the assembly when sitting as a high court was, 
except for small details, identical with that at Rome (cf. Cic. de 
domo sua, 45; Livy, 26. 3). The census followed the same course 
at Bantia as at Rome, except that in Bantia the penalty for non- 
appearance was lighter. A still more striking instance of the 
adoption of a Roman institution occurs in the last paragraph which 
fixes legally the cursus honorum. In this matter the people of Bantia 
have outdone the Romans who had arrived indirectly at the same 
end by prescribing in the /ex Villia annalis the minimum ages at 
which the several offices should be held (Livy, 40. 44. 1). Inci- 
dentally this fact shows that our law is later than 180 B.c. It is 


[ 267 ] 


nn 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


surprising to find that one of the municipal magistrates is a tribune 
(cf. last paragraph), but parallels are found at Nuceria (Dessau, 
6445 e), and Teanum Sidicinum (zhzd. 6298). For recent literature 
on this law, see Bruns and Girard. 


12. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE CONTROVERSIA 
INTER PUBLICANOS ET PERGAMENOS 
(in. saec. I a. Chr.) 


E.E. 4, 213 ff; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 15. 

....Lortplat[ny lov | [po nuepav tpt Ov caravdav | [PeBpoa- 
ptwv (?) év] Kopetio peta | [cvpBovdrtov é]reyvwxdra 6||[ yware 
guyKkdy |tov mept yopas, H|[Tus ev avte]royia éotly Snpoorw-| 
[vats mpos] Tepyapnvovs: év rat | [ovpBovrA]io tapjoav— 
(sequuntur nomina). 

The date of this decree of the senate cannot be determined with 
accuracy. Willems (Le sénat de la république rom. 1, 693 ff-) has 
dated it ca. 98-94 B.c. The dispute between the pudb/icani and the city 
of Pergamum was referred to the senate. Nothing is known about 
the nature of the dispute, but it is probable that the tax-collectors 
attempted to bring the temple-lands under their jurisdiction as at 
Ilium and Oropus (nos. 14, 18). If, however, Pergamum still 
enjoyed the privileges which were conferred upon it by the testa- 
ment of Attalus, the dispute may be over lands claimed by the city 
and therefore exempt from tribute. 


13. DECRETUM CN. POMPEI STRABONIS 
(90 a. Chr.) 

CIL. 12, 709; Bull. arch. com. 38 (1910), 2753 An. ép. 1911, 
no. 126; Girard, p. 61; Dessau, 8888. 

Cn. Pompeius Sex. f. imperator virtutis caussa | equites Hispanos 
ceives Romanos fecit in castreis apud Asculum a. d. xtv k. Dec. | ex 
lege Iulia. In consilio fuerunt: | 

L. Gellius L. f. Tro. Cn. Octavius O. f. 
(et alia nomina quinquaginta septem) 
TURMA SALLVITANA 
Sanibelser Adingibas f. 


(et alia nomina viginti novem) 


(2085) 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Cn. Pompeius Sex. f. imperator | virtutis caussa turmam | 
Salluitanam donavit in | castreis apud Asculum | cornuculo et 
patella, torque, | armilla, palereis; et frumen¢um | duplex. 


A bronze plate, which, with some fragments missing, was first 
published in the Bul/. arch. com. 36 (1908), 169 ff. Later a small 
but important fragment was found, and the inscription was brought 
out in its present form in the Bull. arch. com. 38 (1910), 273-280. 
The decree was issued in the camp at Asculum, but this copy of it 
was kept on the Capitol in Rome. It has been much discussed, both 
before and after the discovery of the new fragment; cf. e.g., An. ép. 
1909, No. 303 1910, pp. 30, 38, 41, 553 1911, pp. 29-303 Pais, 
Studt storict, 2, 113-162; Rendiconti della r. accad. dei Lincet, 
Ser. V, 19 (1910), 72-87; de Sanctis, Atti della r. accad. delle sctenze 
di Torino, 45 (1910), 144 ff.; V. Costa, Rend. della r. accad. delle 
scienze dell instit. di Bologna, 2 (1908-1909), 37-403 zbid. 4 (1910— 
IQII), 44-49; Girard, op. cit.; Stevenson, Fourn. Rom. Studies, 
9 (1919), 95-101. It confers Roman citizenship and other rewards, 
mentioned in the last paragraph, on certain persons. The first grant, 
that of Roman citizenship, is made with the approval of the con- 
siltum, which was composed ordinarily of the military tribunes and 
the chief centurion of each legion. The names of the members of 
the constlium, sixty in all, are given in the early part of the in- 
scription. L. Caesar, after his great victory over the Samnites and 
Lucanians, and sometime in 90 B.c., secured the passage of a law 
which granted citizenship to the allies and Latins; cf. Rotondi, 
Leges publicae popult Romani, 339. Probably the same law also 
authorized the grant of citizenship to provincial auxiliaries of 
federated and stipendiary cities, who had contributed by their valor 
to Roman success. The grant of these rights to provincials at such 
an early date is surprising. It seems to indicate an unusually liberal 
attitude on the part of Strabo. ‘The award in this case was made by 
him after the battle near Firmum (cf. Appian, B.C. 1. 6. 47; Livy, 
Ep. 74,76). The decree was drawn up zm castreis apud Asculum, 
and no mention is made in it of the consulship which Strabo held 
in 89 B.c. It belongs therefore to 90 B.c., and it bears the date of 
Nov. 17. For the arguments in favor of the date 89 B.c., cf. Dessau, 
Joc. cit. and Stevenson, /oc. cit. Perhaps similar rewards were given 


[ 269 | 


Io ore 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


to other Spanish squadrons and to auxiliary troops from other 
provinces and recorded elsewhere, but no other tablets of this sort 
have yet been found. It is the first example of a /ex data issued by 
a general, based on a /ex rogata, cf. pp. 232 ff., and Girard, op. cit. 
Ata later date Pompey the Great was authorized to confer Roman 
citizenship de consiliu sententia singillatim (Cic. pro Balbo, 8. 19), 
and under the empire the award was frequently made in military 
diplomas (cf. also no. 42). An interesting supplement and a parallel 
to Strabo’s decree is furnished by a S.C. of 78 B.c. (Bruns, 41), 
which declared three Greek ship captains as amici populi Romani, 
and granted them immunity and other privileges for the services 
which they had rendered to Rome in time of war. 


14. ILIENSES HONORANT LUCIUM IULIUM CAESAREM 


(89 a. Chr.) 
Ditt. Or. Gr. 440. 


‘O Ojos | Aedxcov ‘lovrAov | Aevaiov viov Katcapa, | tyuntiv 
yevouevoy || Kal atoxatacty|cavta Thy lepav | yopav The 
"AOnvas | tHe Iridds cai eEeromevor | avtHv éx THs Snwootwvias. 

From Troy. Lucius Julius Caesar, as censor, restored the sacred 
lands of the city to the goddess Ilian Athena, and thus exempted 
them from the tribute collected by the publicani (cf. Strabo, p. 642). 
The city of Priene appealed to Rome ca. 100 B.c. for a remission 
of the tax on salt and of the Snuwoovdvar (Inschriften von Priene, 
111). Cf. nos. 12, 18, and Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 284 f. 


15. TABULAE AD MEMORIAM LIBERTATIS 
RESTITUTAE SERVANDAM APTAE 
(81 a. Chr.) 


(4) 
. Populus Laodicensis af Lyco | populum Romanum quei sibei | 
. Salute fuit; benifici ergo quae sibei | benigne fecit || o S#yos o 
... Aaodixéwy tov pos | THe AtdKat Tov Sjpov Tov | “Pwopaiwr 
. .yeyovota éavTa. | cwthpa Kal evepyérnv | apeThns evexev Kal 
.euvoias || THS eis EauToV. 


CIL. 1, 587, 588, 589. 


The dots at the left in (2) mark a break in the stone. 


[ 270 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 
(2) 


Populus Ephesius populum Romanum | salutis ergo quod optinutt 
matorum | sovom leibertatem i... | legatei Heraclitus H. . .fdzus || 
Hermocrates Demetrz filus 5 


(<) 

Communi restituto in maiorum leibertatem | Roma Iovei Capito- 
lino et poplo Romano vzrtutis | benivolentiae benificique caussa 
erga Lucios ab commun | Avxiwv Td Kowdv Kopucdpevov THV 
matp.ov on||moxpatiay thy ‘Pwywny Aw Katretordiot Kal Tar | 5 
Snuwe TH[L] ‘Pwopaiwy aperis evexev Kal evvoias | cal evepyecias 
THs eis TO KoLvov TO AvKiov. 

Three stone tablets found in Rome. Ephesus and the Commune 
Lyciae express their thanks to the Roman people for the gift of 
libertas, and Laodicea likewise shows its gratitude. The inscriptions 
probably belong to the year 81 B.c., when Sulla and Murena settled 
the affairs of Lycia (cf. Appian, Mithr. 61; Tac. Ann. 3. 62). It is 
probable, though not certain, that Rome recognized these cities 
as civitates liberae (cf. Henze, De ctvitatibus liberis, 70-71; Momm- 
sen, St. R. 3, 670, n. 3; Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 337, n. 9). An 
inscription found at ‘Tabae (no..16), as interpreted by Mommsen 
(Hermes, 26 (1891), 145-148 = Ges. Schr. 5, 514), throws a little 
light on some of Sulla’s arrangements in Asia Minor (cf. nos. 17, 19). 
For a summary of them, cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 39. 
For Ephesus, cf. zizd. 116. “The Commune Lyciae was one of the 
oldest leagues in the empire and in Strabo’s time numbered twenty- 
three cities with the right of voting in the xowov (cf. Marquardt, 
St. Verw. 1, 376 f.3 Reid, Municipalities of the Roman Empire, 
363 f.; Guiraud, Les assemblées prov. 41). 


16. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE TABENIS 
(82 a. Chr.) 
Ditt. Or. Gr. 442. 
fare ates Tots Te Bacidéws Hryenwoow | duvapeciy] Te érravdp0- 
talta vmép THv ToAcwY THS Acias | Kai T]As “EXAdSos avtuTe- 
Tay[Oac* apécKery opotws THL| svy]KrAnT@L Kal THL Sjwor [TOV 
‘Pwyalov tavta Tavta Kata Ta] || dptota eivar éoecOai Te, 5 


[27 ta 


Io 


15 


Io 


T5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


[ty te miotiw mpos THv ovy|KrAn|Tov Kal Tov Shyov TaV 
‘Pwopaliov rernpnuévny ae | dia wlvnuns éyew eew ter bolas 
Té Twas THs | Tov]TwY apeTHs Kat KaTaXroyhs E[vexev avTois | 
amo] cuvBovriov yvouns Aevetos [Kopyyduos || LUA ]as adro- 
Kpatop auvexopnoev [m]or[ers Smws | idi]ous Tots vopors 
aipéceaiv te wawv: | [drrw]s Te ywplov Ouyacor, 6 eat évTds 
trav [o|pio lv avtar, éav BovrAwvrat, oyupdaowow: [THY | Te ov ]v- 
KANnToV Tov Te OHwov TOV Pwpaiwr [d.||ara ]vBavewv tadta avdTois 
Kanes kat [mpoon|Kovt|ws Kai akiws adtay Seddc0at Te.... 

From Tabae. This city had remained loyal to the Romans during 
the invasion of Asia by Mithradates, and was rewarded by Sulla 
in a fashion similar to Stratonicea (cf. no. 17). It was given the 
revenues of certain towns and, as an ally of Rome, was permitted 
to use its own laws. Permission to fortify part of their territory 
was also granted (cf. no. 5; Viereck, Hermes, 25 (1890), 624 ff 
Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 5. 514 ff). 


17. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE STRATONICENSIBUS 
(ca. 81 a. Chr.) 

Ditt. Or. Gr. 441, ll. 1-129; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 16. 

[Aedxvos Kopyijduos A]eveiou [uios] 2vAXas ’Esradpdditos | 
[Suetadtwp XtTpatov|céwy ap[yo]vor Bovrre Sywar yaipe. | 
[Ove ayvoodpuev buds] S1a rpo[ylovev wavra ra Sixasa | [pos 
Thy nueTépa ly nyeu[ov tay memounKortas Kai év || [wavte Kapoor 
THhv pos was wilot |v eiAvKpives TeTHpHKOTAS | [év TE THE 
mpos MiOpadalrnv m[o]Aéu@s mpwtovs tov év tHe | [Acias 
avtTiTetaypmévous Kali va tadta Kivdvvous todnovs | [Te Kal 
TavtodaTrovs| vumép Tav nweTépwv Snuooiwy | [mrpaypatev 
mpoOvuol|rata alvladedeyuévous || ....-.- eee eee e eee Kal 
t[ovs Kowovs] Kal Tods ldtwtixods | [ptrcas E]velKev m]pds 
nas evvoias Te | [kal yapitos, Kal év THL TOV TroN|éwou KaLpaL 
mpos te | [tas adAXas THs "Acias modes temp lecBevKoras 
kal mp[ols | [tas THs “EXXabos........-- ]Acv«vos Kop[vndcos 
SvrAras ‘Esradpdditos Suxtlatwp || Xtpatolwxéwv apyover 
Bovarje djpat yatpev.| | WpecBevrais tyulerépors TO yevopevov 
i706 avykarnt jov Soypa | Todt [wapédaxa]. | 

Aevxios Kopvydilos Aevaiov vids XvAAas >Emadpoditos 


[ 272 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


dixt]atwp | cuyKkrjTtor ovri[veBovretcato mpd Apepav e 
ka ]Aavear || Ampiriov év Tat xowerion ypahouévar Taphoav 
PJaios | Bavvvos Patou [vids............+, DP Jaios | Bovdarvios 
Dai[ov vids........* wept dv Stpatovexe jis éx Xpv|cao[péwr ] | 


Tataivios) LéepfarXdougy iinet ait onisterde oad seid bfele sinus 
un | Lh Bice recog y Dla cis rateva syncs seer emai aed tah hcl a g.74 
Atoviowos ‘EL... ....mperBevtal Noyous érrouy |oavTo | cup po'- 


Vows Kal akorovOws Tet UTpaToviKéwv Andiopate | a€vodvTes 
cuvndecbar emi tat TIA Snuocia mpay[wata Tod Snwov | [Tot 
‘Pwpaiov év Bertiow xaltactdace, elvas || [67s ypucody 
otépavov tapa ths i|dias wovews THe cuyxrAntar | [avabetvar 
e&ht aro TaNavtov d|iaxociwr, | [Ovciav re év Tht KarretwrXios 
d7ws| womjoar é&Ht bmép THs v[t«|ns | [kal THs Hryeuovias Tod 
dyjwov ToD] ‘Pwpaiwyr, | [dws Te TO NovTov AevKiws Kopynriwr 
Alevxiov vids YvrArav “Enadpoditw: || [dictarops paivnras 
Xtpatovixéwy] SHuws diravOpwras Kexpho[O lac: | [érret Te 6 
Shmos ev Tt Kalpar THS elpnv |ns cvvernpyaev THv Ldiav | [evvordy 

\ , \ / \ \ lel X c / \ 
Te Kal TiatLv Kal diriav] mpos Tov Shuov Tov Pwpator | [xal 

n al » a ? / ¢ / > > a / 

mpatos Tav ev TH Aciat, bre MiOp jadarns ev avt[ He | Secvorata 
> / / > / > \ as \ 2 21h 
eTupavveuer, mpoeireTo av |ruteTayOar: || [ere 5é 0 Bacireds és 





Thy ToAW émrHrOev], EXov 8 exparnole |v Hailes Whe ie Wished 
[Aevxios Kopynriws Acuxiov vids XvrAXraL] | deeTarope poled 
ET bo Amravati oie js) ves; nbn af ie)\ol esate AtekONe [GRIEG OF LOS COU 


eTnpnaev ael THY UTdpyovcayv avTw.]| evvoLav Kai TiLoTLY] Kal 
cuppayilav mpos Tov oAwov Tov ‘Popaiwy, Ta i]|dia mpaywata 
x \ , \ b] / / \ , 
kata T nv mpoaipecey [THv éxetv@v dtotxnoas, kat MiOpadarne | || 
4 > / \ \ oy] , \ i 
TONE{LOV errolonae, Kat Tov idsov ont amas Oupov RRR UR 
anpenaxen] | tHe Bacrrsxje BlovAn |e cai Svvdper[.......... 


veceeeceeeees | Ocxatous Te Kal vopuors Kai ePiop[ots Tots 
Hod a > A > / v4 A e¢/ / 
LoLous, ols €yp@v|to érady|w, drws ypevTat, doa Te [Wndicpara 
émoincav tov|trov tov trojAéwou évexev, dv mpds Baal[tréa 
MiOpadarny avédecEar, || dws TlavtTa tavta Kvipia dow | 
[lIjndacov te], Oeunooorv, Képapov, ywpia [xwpas Arpévas 
mpoco|dovs te Tav]| 7drcwv, ov AevKtos Kopy[rjd0os SUAXAaS 
avtoxpatwp | THs ToUTwY] apEeTHs KaTadoyis Te élvexev Tpoc- 


20 


25 


30 


Bie) 


40 


45 


50 


, / 7 fal > cal ” b] A \ 
wWpicev cuvexopn|oev, Orws TlavTa avtois éxew éF[fe- || TO 55 


AMA Rares 18 


60 


65 


7O 


75 


80 


85 


90 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


iepov rhs] ‘Exarns, émepavertd[rns Kal peyiotns Oeas, éx 
TOA|NOD TE TL] WOpEvOY KAL TONAL... reece eee cece ee eeee| 
TO Te Téwev]os, Omws TovTO dov[Aov Vrapynt, | wept Te TOY 
&|r[orwr]or[wv avdrois ev THe Toréumt, d7rws]| 7 oLvy]er[nTos 
Ta. ap|xov7[e Tt]au eis “Aciay ropevopévwr évtoras || dau, va 
ppolyric|ne cal érvatpopyy wommontat, 67ws Ta Eeuhavy | avTois 
atrodso0nvar ppovtiont, TOUS TE aixYMarWTOUS | KOMicwYTAaL TrEpi 
re Tov [Nlourav iva TUXwot TOV Sixaiwy: | Strws Te TpETBeEv- 
tais Tois Tapa {tpatovixéwy eis ‘Padunv | mapecopuévols éxTOos 
Tod otixou of dpyovTes obyKANTOY S:dH0[ tv" ] || wept TovTOU Tod 
mpaynatos olTws édofev: mpecRevtais | Xtpatovixéwy Kata 
Tpocwtroyv év THe avyKAnTaL PiravOpa| mas arroxpLOnvat, xapiTa 
piriav cuppaxyiay avavedcacbat, | tos mpecBevtas av[dpa|s 
Kadovs Kat ayabods Kat dhirous | cummayous Te pel Tépo lus 
Tapa Snpov KaXod Kal ayabod || Kal hirou cuppdyou [Te Hp JeTE- 
pov mpocayopevaas edokev. | Ilepi te wv ovTos of [wpecRev]ral 
Novyous érroinoavto Kai Trep[t wv] | Aevevos Kopynrulos WAXAa|s 
"Exragpoditos Suxtdtwp Royolus | éroijoato, yvworoy eivat 
‘Pw jatos [kata Tas atroataneicas | twap|a tov ’Aciav Thy Te 
‘EdAdba [Staxatacyovtav taev Te év || TavTalis Tals émapyelass 
ampeaBevl_ tay yeyevnucvoy émiotoras | Tovs] Yrpatovixeis THv 
re hidiav KL al wiotey Kal evvotav pds Tov | dh ]nov Tov ‘Popaiwy 
dia TérOus [ev Katpat elpnvns Torémov | Te] (a)el cuvTETHPHKEVAL 
oTpatiol tas Te Kal ciTwL Kal weydrats | Samrdv jas ta Snmoota 
Tpaypata [tod dnuwov Tod Pwpaiwr || rpo|Oumotata UTepnoti- 
REVOLT bis NN ae cine (UR US DIrEp THON LeaNO pa- 
avvn[s THs.éavT@v avtots cvuptre| ron jeuncévat Tots Te Baciréo[s 
MiOpaddtov jyepoow | Suv |dpueciv te érravdporata Te pl Trav 
Todewr 7H5 Aocias kal | THs] “ENAdbos aly ]riteTay Oar: || [epi 
TOUT@Y TOV TpayuLaT@V oUTwS Edokev* ApécKey THL Tvy|KAHT@L 
avopav ayabay] Sixaiwy [te arroluvnulovedew Kai mrpol|voety 
dmws Aevxulos Kopyydcos LAAs ’Erradpodit[os | Suatatwp 
Tov av |riTamiav Eévia avrots Kata TO OcaTtalypa Sov| vat KeXevonL, 
ois] Te vomors eOrcpots Te idtows TpoTepor || [éxpavrTo, TovToLs] 
xpacbwaav: | [cous Te vomous avto |i Wndicpara Te éroinoay 
TouTou Tov [7oAé|uou evexev TOV mp los MiOpaddrny yevomévon, 
iva Tovtolis Tavta | tavta KUpLa UTap|X¥@otv: as TE TWAS THS 


[ 274 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


TOUTWY apeTHls KaTado|yns Te Evexev peT a cypBovrtLov yvomns 
Aevxtos SvrA[Aas adv||roxpatwp Tots av|rois tmpocwpiceyv cuv- 
exopnaoev [sodstei|as mpocddous xwlpia Kwpmas Awuévas TE 
TovTo[ts, va tadta | adtois éyew €Eju: TOlv Te Shpwov Tov ‘Po- 


POLLO Ls Persuegs ys cial si rai.) wie tekstas: oir nee DOD OPT ONS CLE LOS 
TOMGUT| OU is. cleue'n tc cis isuare dyete ene as tuak ciate teeenneee | t Carat TDG 
TOVULKEVT LPN LEN Dt [EVA siels e's a eee ER elal| aie ens «(| 


amobex[Ta bmdpyely Setv: | [Orw]s te Aevetos Kopyyri[os 
Lud ]ras Exradpoditos Sixtat[lwp, av aitar | ha jivntas, as adros 
avtoxpatwp Xtpatovixedaow Tori telas | K]opas yopas 
Aimévas Te TpocwpiceD, errvyvart SvaTakn[s boas Exdaotn| | tpoc- 
ddous Xrpatovxedow Terje’ || [ed]v te Scatdéni, pos Tavtas 
Tas ToXtTeias, ds Yrplatowxedow] | mpocw@picev, ypdupata 
atroareiAnt, iva TocovTov t[édos]| UTpatovixedow TerOow: | 
fe) f vf ” pies ih be / / ¢ / ’ / 
[rt ]odro Te, oiruves av Tote aei Aciav THY Te EAXASa el Trapyeias | 
dva|xatéxwow, ppovtifwcw dudaciv te épyaciay, ila tadta]|| 
ee / \ id \ an ¢ / v4 3 A 
obTas yir[wlvras. | To [fep lov tis “El karns] otras 7[t dovadov*] | 
> / ee vx ees Pte / > /, , >) 
avObTratos bots av dei “Aciav ér[apxetar] | diaxaréyni, érr- 
yvotw ativa avtois ale lore | of TE TLves TADTA Sunprracay ot 





Té Tivels Sltaxaré||youow avTd, va map avTav arrodoPhvar 
atroxatalaTrabfjvat dpovtiont’ iva te TOVS alxparwTous | ava- 
Kopicacba, Stvavrat bTrép Te TOV ALolira@v | Tpayudt@y TeV 
dixaiwyv tvyYwow o[U]tl@ xalOas av | avtois éx Tv Snpmociwv 
mpayuat[wv mial|teds || te THs idlas datyntar: dokev. | 
Lréhavov te Tov Tapa Tod Sywov | [THe cvyKAnTwL] arrectad- 
pévov, ob dv Aevxuos [Kopy7d]uos | LvAXas *’Eradpoditos 
duxtat[lwp | ay|jtas [ayabov brrws avabeivas avtois || é&hu, 
Ouaiay Te év THt KarretwXias av 0é|Nwawy Straws avtots rounoat 
é&fu. | Tots te mpecRevtais mapa XtpatovKéwy eis | “Pownv 
Tmapecopevors Gd0€€ a |UyxAntov | [Uo TOV apxovT@V éKTOs TOD 
atixou 616 joo Oat. "Kdo€gev. 

From Lagina. The city of Stratonicea had remained loyal to 
the Romans in the struggle with Mithradates. This decree of the 
senate confirms the action taken by the dictator Sulla in regard to 
the city. The alliance with Rome is renewed. The citizens are 
allowed to keep their own laws and customs. ‘Their legislation 
during the invasion of Mithradates is confirmed. Sulla is authorized 


[ 275 | 18—2 


95 


100 


105 


Ito 


II5 


120 


125 


IO 


15 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


to determine the amount of tribute which should be paid to the 
city by the towns and villages which he has assigned to Stratonicea. 
The shrine of Hecate is granted the privilege of asylum (Tac. 
Ann. 3. 62). Cf. nos. 15, 16, 67. 


18. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE AMPHIARAI 
OROPI AGRIS 
(73 a. Chr.) 


Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 18; IG. vit, 413; de Ruggiero, L’arbi- 
trato pubblico, 25; Bruns, 42; Ditt. Sy//.3 747; Riccobono, p. 209. 


M[dapx]os Tepévtcos Madpxov vids Ovdppwv Aevxordos, 
Taios Kdovos Aevxilov vids | Aoy]yivos trratos ‘Opawrriov 
7 a I / Pang d 9 x 4 
dpyovaw BovrAn Snuw. yaipew. Ei éppwobe, ed av éx[or]. 
[“Yuds eidévar BovropueOa, Huds Kata TO THs cuvKAHTOV Soypa 
TO yevopevoy é[it Aevxillou Acciviov Madpxov Adpnrtov 
UmaT@V éTeyvMKéval Tepl avTiNoyLav ToV avaulecor] || Oeds 
"Audiapaws Kal TOV SnmooLtwvar yeyovoTav (éTeyVmKEvat). 

\ A 3 rn ’ / > a“ / > 

IIpo pds ei[dvov | | OxropSpiav ey Bacthiny Ilopxia ev 
cupBovriw: taphoav Maapxkos Kdavédcos Maapx[ov] | vids 
"Apynoons Madpxerros, Taios KrXavdsos Tatov vids “Apyncans 
[raBep, | Maapxos Kactos Madpxov vids Uapevtiva, Taios 
Auxivios Taiov vids | Wepertiva, Taios Avxivios Patou vids 
xTnrativals) Yaxépdas, || Aevxros Ovorvoxios Aeviou vids 
"Apyvinaons, Aevevos Adptoos Aevxiov vids | Inmipia, Tdios 
‘Avvatos Taiov vids KrAutouiva, Maapxos TurXvos Maapxov 
vios | Kopyndia Kixépwr, Koivtos”A&tos Maapxov vidos Kupiva, 
Koivros Topuanios Koiv|rouv vies “Aplin loons “Poddos, AdXos 
Kaoxéddos Avdov vids 0 vios ‘Payrta, | Koivtos Muvixcos 
Koivrov vios Tnpnvtiva Oéppos, Maapxos Lom)ixcos || Maapeov 
vidos “Opatia Yxarovas, Titos Maivios Titov vids Aepovia, 
Aevxios | KrXavdios Acuxiou vids Acuovia. 

IIepi av “Epuodwpos Odvvrrixou vids, tepeds | “Avdrapdon, 
OOTLS TPOTEPOV UTO THS TUVVKAHTOU GUYLAXOS TpOTNnyopEevpE|VOS 
b) / LWibe-d / , ey, / / 
éotw, Kal Ade&idnuos Oeod@pov vids, Anpaiveros Oecotérov 

ey, ACL i, / b] / 
vios, mperBev|tal Opwrriwy, Aoyous érroinoavTo 

ém(e)i €v TR THS picO@cews vou@ avTat at || yo@par Urek- 
Bs Piswedd A vA s a > t e lal 
ecpnmevatr etolv, as ANevKios SUAXaS Oedv APavatwv iepav 


[ 276 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES | 


Tenevov | purakhs évexev cuveywpnoev (oTreFerpnuevas 
eiaiv), TaUTas TE TAS TpOG|ddoUS, TrEpl OV ayEeTal TO TPAypA, 
Aevxwos XwAras THs Oedse Apdiapdwe tp(o)cauips|cer(!), 
draws wmép TOUT@Y TaY Ywpev Tpocodoy TaL Snmoctwvy 
pn TeNOC LV * | 
Kal twept ov Aevxtos Aopérros AivoBarBos birép Snumooiwvav 
et7rev || 
ETEL EV TOL THS wicOa@ceEws VOMwL AUTAL al Yopat VTreEELpN- 
pévat eiciv, | as Aevxtos SvAXas Deady aBavatwy ‘epov 
Tepevov purakhs evexev | cvveywpncer, ote 0 Audiapaos, 
Ot avTaL ai YOpat cvvKeywpnpévat | NéyovTat, Yeds éEotuy, 
dtwsTavtas Tas YoOpas KapTric lea Oar €&7 | Tovs Snumootwvas: 
avo avvBovrjiov yvoOuns yvounv arednval|ucOa* 0 éréyvopev 
THLE TUVKANTWL Tposavoicouer, TOTO 6 Kai | es THY TOD 
UTopVnwaTw@Y OéENTOV KaTEXwpLTapeD * 
Tept yopas | Opwias, wept js avtiroyla Hv mpos TOUS 
Snpootwvas, Kata Tov THS | utcP@docews vowoy avTn UTeEE- 
pnuevn eotiv, iva wn o Snmootd|yns avtyy KapTiCntac: 
KATA TO THS TUVKAHTOV Sdyua érréyvaper. || 
"Ev t@® THs picOdcews vow treEecpnuévnv SoKxel eivar 
ottws: | éxtos te TovTar 7 el Te Soya cuvKEAHTOV, avTo- 
Kpatop avtoxparopés tle] | juérepoe Kataroyns Oeav aba- 
vaTwv iepav Teuevov Te hvrakhs | KapmiferOar Ewxav 
Katédtrov, extTos Te TOUT@Y, & AevKeos | Kopyndsos YvAAas 
avToKpatwmp amo ovvBovAtov yveuns Oewv || adavatwv 
lepOv Teuevav Te pvdrakhs evexev KapTrilerOar Edaxer, | d 
TO AUTO 1) TUVKANTOS ETEKUPWOEV OUTE META TAUTA SoypaT. | 
TUVKANHTOU aKupoV eyevnOn. 
Aevxwos Kopyydsos SvAXas ato cvv|Bovrtiov yrouns yrounv 
elpnkévas Soxet* 
THS EVXHS ATroddcews | Evexev TH iep@ Audiapaov yopay 
mpootiOnu travtn TavTobev Todas || ytALous, iva Kal abrn 
 XOpPAa UTapyn Acvros 
acavtTws THt Oew “Audiapaws | cabrepwKévar 
THS TOAEwWS Kal THs KYOpas Nipévav Te TOV Opwtriwy | Tas 
Mpoaodous atacas eis TOvs ayavas Kal Tas Ouacias, as 
‘Opwrvo | cuvtedovow Ged 'Audiapaws, opoiws 5é Kal as 


[ 277 ] 


25 


30 


A 35 


40 


45 


50 


55 


60 


65 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


dv peta tadta brép Ths | vinns Kal THs Hryeu“ovias ToD 
Snuou tod “Pwpaiwv cvvtedécovaty, || exTos aypav TOV 
‘Eppodwpou Orvrrrixou viod, tepéws Apdiapdov, tov | dia 
tédous év TH hiria Tod Syyov Tod “Papaiwy wewevnKoros. 

Ilepi rod|rov Tov mwpaypatos Soyua ouvedytov émi Aevtov 
LvAra “Eradpoditov, | Koivrov Merérrov EtvceBots trratwv 
émrixexupw@pevov Soxel elvat, | OTrep 7 obYKANTOS edoypaTiceD Eis 
TOUTOUS TOUS ANOYOUS* 

doa Te Ged. || “Audsapawe kal Tat iepo avtov Aev«Kios 
Kopyjdvos SUAXas aro cu(u)Bovriov | yvouns mporwpicev 
TUVEXWPNTEV, TA AVTA 1) TUVKANTOS TOUT WL TAL Dede | SoOFvat 
cvvxwpnOhvat Hyncato. 

"Ev tét cvpBovriwt taphnoay | of avtoi of éu mpaypatov 
cupBeBovrcvpévov SérATwL TpeTnL, | KNpwMaTL TecoaperKal- 
SeKaTwL. 

Adypa cuverntov TovTO yevopuevov || éoTiv* TPO nmEepav 
SexaeTTa Karavdav NoevBpiov év xopetios: | ypadopévov 
mapnoav Titos Matmos Titov vids Aewavia, | Koivros ‘Payxuos 
Koivrov vids KnXavdia, Tdios OdeédrArwos Taiov | vios Kupiva 
Ovdppwv’ rept ov Maapxos Aevcorrdos, Daios Kaatos | trratou 
émiyvoytes amnvyetkav trept Opwrias yw@pas Kal tov || dnpo- 
cLoaveav éavTovs éemeyvwKévat, acavtas THY Opwrioy | ydpav 
brreEetpnuévny Soxeiv elvar Kata Tov THS proOwcews vopoy, | 7 
doxeiv Tovs Snuociwvas TadTa KapTrivecOat* ovTws, | Kafas av 
avTois €x TOV SnuociwYy TpayuaTav TictTEeds Te THs | dias 
édaiveto, édo€ev. 

From Oropus. We have included in this collection only a few 
of the examples of arbitration in the cities under the jurisdiction 
of Rome (cf. no. 8). The citizens of Oropus had received from Sulla 
certain revenues from lands and customs to be devoted to the worship 
of the god Amphiaraus. The sources of this income could not be 
taxed by the publicani in collecting the tithes from the province. 
After the death of Sulla the pudb/icani sought to collect the former 
tax from the Oropians, claiming that Amphiaraus was not a god, 
since he had once been a mortal (Cic. de deor. nat. 3. 49). Oropus 
protested their claim, sending an embassy to Rome. The senate 
referred the matter to the consuls for arbitration. They chose a 


[Vereen 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


committee of fifteen senators who reviewed the evidence and decided 
in favor of Oropus. The document contains the letter of the consuls 
to the Oropians, the decision of the committee appointed to arbitrate 
the case, the record of Sulla’s action, and the decree of the senate 
confirming it, and, finally, the decree of the senate confirming 
the decision of the court of arbitration. Cf. nos. 8, 46, 57, 104. 


19. LEX ANTONIA DE TERMESSIBUS 
(ca. 71 a. Chr.) 


CIL. 1, 204; Bruns, 14; Dessau, 38; Girard, pp. 68-70; Ricco- 
bono, pp. 105-107. 


C. Antonius M. f., Cn. Corne/ius. .f., Q. Marctus..f., L. Hos- 
HAUS OL optus. . fey AL. OP Glens apy, Ge) ARI ee) 
CIEEUIUEO TELA Vie. toon f-, | C. Fundanius C. f. tr. pl. des. s. 
plebem zoure rogaverunt....... .....{ preimus scivit. | 

Quei Thermeses maiores Peisidae fuerunt, queique | eorum 
legibus ‘Thermesium maiorum Pisidarum | ante k. April., quae 
fuerunt L. Gellio Cn. Lentulo cos., | Thermeses maiores Pisidae 
factei sunt, queique || ab ieis prognati sunt erunt, iei omnes | posterei- 
que eorum Thermeses maiores Peisidae | leiberei amicei socieique 
populi Romani sunto, | eique legibus sueis ita utunto, itaque ieis | 
omnibus sueis legibus ‘Thermensis maioribus || Pisideis utei liceto, 
quod advorsus hanc legem | non fiat. | 

Quei agrei quae loco aedificia publica preivatave | Thermensium 
maiorum Pisidarum intra fineis | eorum sunt fueruntve L. Marcio 
Sex. Iulio cos., || quaeque insulae eorum sunt fueruntve ieis | con- 
solibus, quei supra scriptei sunt, quodque | earum rerum ieis con- 
sulibus iei habuerunt | possederunt usez fructetgue sunt, quae de ieis 
rebus | locata non sunt, utet antea habeant possideant ; quaeque || de 
leis rebus agrets loceis aedifictets locata sunt, ac ne | locentur sancitum 
est sanctione, quae facta | est ex lege rogata L. Gellio Cn. Lentulo 
cos., ea omnia | Thermeses maziores Pistdae habeant possideant, | 
ieisque rebus loceis agreis aedificiers utantur fruantur || ita, utei ante 
Mitridatis bellum, quod preimum | fuit, habuerunt possederunt uset 
fructeique sunt. | 

Quae Thermensorum mazorum Pisidarum publica | preivatave 


2799) 


Col. 1 


IO 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


35 
Col. 11 


Io 


5 


20 


25 


30 


Se 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


praeter locata agros aedificia sunt | fueruntve ante bellum Mitri- 
datis, quod preimum || factum est, quodque earum rerum iei antea | 
habuerunt possederunt usei fructeive sunt, | quod eius ipsei sua 
voluntate ab se non abalienarunt, | ea omnia Termensium maiorum 
Pisidarum, utei sunt | fuerunt, ita sunto, Itemque leis ea omnia || 
habere possidere uutei frueique liceto. | | 

Ouos Thermenses maiores Pisidae leiberos servosve | bello 
Mitridatis ameiserunt, magistratus prove | magistratu, quoia de ea 
re juris dictio erit, quoguwe | de ea re in ious aditum erit, ita de ea re 
ious || deicunto iudicia recuperationes danto, utei lez eos recuperare 
possint. | 

Nei quis magistratus prove magistratu legatus nezve | quis alius 
meilites in oppidum Thermesum maiorum | Pisidarum agrumve 
Thermensium maiorum | Pisidarum hiemandi caussa introducito, 
neive || facito, quo quis eo meilites introducat quove ibei | meilites 
hiement, nisei senatus nominatim, utei Thermesum | maiorum 
Pisidarum in hibernacula meilites | deducantur, decreverit; neive 
quis magistratus | prove magistratu legatus neive quis alius facito || 
neive inperato, quo quid magis iei dent praebeant | ab ieisve aufe- 
ratur, nisel quod eas ex lege Porcia | dare praebere oportet oportebit. | 

Quae leges quodque ious quaeque consuetudo L. Marcio | Sex. 
Julio cos. inter civeis Romanos et Termenses || maiores Pisidas 
fuit, eaedem leges eidemque ious | eademque consuetudo inter ceives 
Romanos et | T’ermenses maiores Pisidas esto; quodque quibusque | 
in rebus loceis agreis aedificieis oppideis iouris | "Termensium maiorum 
Pisidarum ieis consulibus, || quei supra scriptei sunt, fuit, quod eius 
praeter | locata agros aedificia ipsei sua voluntate ab se non | ab- 
alienarunt, idem in eisdem rebus loceis agreis | aedificieis oppideis 
Termensium maiorum Pisidarum | ious esto; et quo minus ea, quae 
in hoc capite scripta || sunt, ita sint fiant, eius hac lege nihilum 
rogatur. | 

Quam legem portorieis terrestribus maritumeisque | “Termenses 
maiores Phisidae capiundeis intra suos { fineis deixserint, ea lex ieis 
portorieis capiundeis | esto, dum nei quid portori ab ieis capiatur, 
quel publica || populi Romani vectigalia redempta habebunt. Quos | 
per eorum fineis publicani ex eo vectigali transportabunt |........ 
(continuabatur in tabula deperdita). 


[goon 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Bronze tablet found in Rome in the sixteenth century, now in 
the museum at Naples. The inscription is engraved in two columns. 
‘The second column begins with the words Quos Thermenses. The 
heading, I de Termest. Pisid. mai., shows that this is the first of 
several tablets which made up the original law. The Ambrosian 
Library at Milan has a copy of the first tablet, which purports to 
have been made by Mariangelus Accursius shortly after the dis- 
covery of the tablet. From this copy certain missing words have 
been supplied in the CJL.; but Bormann (Festschrift Hirschfeld, 
434 ff.) has given reasons for believing that the tablet was defective 
when found, and that the added words are conjectures of Accursius. 
They are here printed in italics (col. 1, ll. 18 ff). Thermeses maiores 
Peisidae (or Tepunocets of meifoves) distinguishes this town 
from Tepynocets of mpos Oivodvdois. Many other inscriptions 
have been found on its site; cf. ‘fahreshefte d. ést. archdol. Inst. 
3 (1900), 196 ff; B.C.H. 23 (1899), 165 ff, 280 ff; 24 (1900), 
334 ff. 

The praescriptio shows that the law is a plebiscite, submitted 
by C. Antonius, Cicero’s colleague in 63 B.c., and certain other 
tribunes. The names of the other tribunes have been supplied from 
the list of the colleagues of Antonius given in CIL. 1, 593. The 
presence of the phrase de senatus sententia in the praescriptio seems 
to fix the date of the plebiscite before 70 B.c., because the legislation 
of Sulla forbidding the tribunes to submit a measure to the popular 
assembly until the senate has taken action on it is apparently still 
in force. The document is subsequent to 72 B.c., the year of the 
consulship of Gellius and Lentulus, and probably falls in 71 B.c. 
Probably these privileges were granted to Termessus because of 
her loyalty in the Mithradatic wars. For other cities whose loyalty 
was rewarded ina similar way, cf. nos. 15, 16,17, and 21. By virtue 
of this law Termessus became a czvitas sine foedere immunis et libera. 
For an analysis of the rights of such a city, cf. pp. 42 ff and Momm- 
sen, St. R. 3, 686 ff. 

The people of Termessus are styled /ezheret amicet socteique popult 
Romani. They are given the right /egebus sues utz, the possession 
of their land without the payment of a stzpendium, freedom from 
the billeting of troops, and payment for necessary requisitions made 


2S ne 


IO 


T5 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


upon them. Their rights over against Roman citizens are guaranteed, 
and they may collect portoria terrestria marttumaque. Their right 
legibus sueis uti (cf. no. 40) is however limited by the proviso, quod 
advorsus hane legem non fiat, and the billeting of troops may be 
authorized by a special vote of the Roman senate. No mention Is 
made of the rights of coinage or of receiving exiles. With regard 
to the property rights granted to the people of Termessus in Il. 27— 


35, of. Bormann, op. cit. 439. 


20. LEX MUNICIPI TARENTINI 
(88-62 a. Chr. ?) 


Dessau, 6086; Bruns, 27; Riccobono, p. 1323 Girard, p. 61. 


. .ne esse liceat neive qués quod eius municipi pequniae publicae 
sacrae | religios<s>ae est erit frawdato neive avortito neive facito quo 
eorum | quid fiat, neive per litteras publicas fraudemve publicum 
peius | facito d(olo) m(alo). Quei faxit, quanti ea res erit quadruplum 
multae esto, || eamque pequniam muzicipio dare damnas esto elusque 
pequniae | magistratus quei quomque in municipio erit petitio 
exactioque esto. | 

III Ivir(ei) aedilesque quei h. 1. primei erunt quei eorum ‘Tarentum 
venerit, | is in diebus xx proxumeis quibus post h. |. datam primum 
Tarentum venerit | facito quei pro se praes stat praedes praediaque 
ad 111Ivir(os) det quod satis || sit, quae pequnia publica sacra religiosa 
elus municipi ad se in suo magistratu | pervenerit, eam pequniam 
municipio ‘Tarentino salvam recte esse futuram, | eiusque rei 
rationem redditurum ita utei senatus censuerit. Isque mutvir, | 
quoi ita praes dabitur, accipito idque in tabu/ezs publiceis scriptum 
sit | facito. Quique quomque comitia duovireis aedilibusve rogan- 
deis || habebit, is antequam maior pars curlarum quemque eorum 
quei | magistratum eis comitieis petent renuntiabit, ab eis quei petent 
praedes | quod satis sit accipito, quae pequnia publica sacra religiosa 
eius municipi | zd quemque eorum in eo magistratu pervenerit, eam 
pequniam municipio | Tarentino salvam recte esse futuram, etusque 
rei rationem redditurum || ita utei senatus cemsuerit, zdque in tabuleis 
publiceis scriptum sit facito, | quodque guozque negoti publice in 
municipio de s(enatus) s(ententia) datum erit negotive | publicei 


bee? a) 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


gesserit pequniamque publicam dederit exegerit, is quoi ita negotium | 
datum erit negotive quid publice gesserz¢ pequniamve publicam 
dederit | exegerit, eius rei rationem senatui reddito refertoque in 
diebus X proxumers || quibus senatus eius municipi censuerzt sine 25 
d(olo) m(alo). | 

Quei decurio municipi Tarentiei est erit queive in municipio 
Tarentizo im | senatu sententiam deixerit, is in oppido ‘Tarentei 
aut intra eius municzp: | fineis aedificium quod non minus Mp tegu- 
larum tectum sit habeto see | d(olo) m(alo). Quei eorum ita aedi- 
ficium suom non habebit seive quis eorum || aedificium emerit 30 
mancupiove acceperit quo hoic legi fraudem faxzt, | is in annos 
singulos HS n. 199 municipio Tarentino dare damnas esto. | 

Nei quis in oppido quod eius municipi erit aedificium detegito 
neive demo/ito | neive disturbato nisei quod non deterius restituturus 
erit nisei de s(enatus) s(ententia). | Sei quis adversus ea faxit, quantz 
id aedificium fxerit, tantam pequniam || municipio dare damnas esto 35 
eiusque pequniae guei volet petitio est. | Magi(stratus) quei exegerit 
dimidium in publicum referto dimidium in ludeis quos | publice 
in eo magistratu facief consumito, seive ad monumentum suom | in 
publico consumere volet lzcefo, idque ei s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) facere 
liceto. | 

Sei quas vias fossas cloacas muivir uvir aedilisve eius municipi 
caussa || publice facere immittere commutare aedificare munire 40 
volet, intra | eos fineis quei eius municipi erunf, quod eius sine 
iniuria fiat, id ei facere | liceto. | 

Quei pequniam municipio Tarentina non debebit sei quis eorum 
quei | municeps erit neque eo sexennio proxumo, quo exeire volet, 
duovirum. 

(religui versus, maxime mutili, omissi sunt) 

The charter of Tarentum was engraved on a brass tablet. Of the 
original, only a fragment of the ninth table, found in an ancient 
well, is now preserved in the museum of Naples. 

Tarentum was founded as a Roman colony by Gracchus in 
123 B.c. To this settlement the name Neptunia was given. After 
the Social war Tarentum obtained the czvitas Romana and became 
a municipium. The date of this charter, which was a /ex data, cannot 
be determined with exactness. It is not earlier than 89 B.c. and 


[28s 0 J 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


possibly should not be dated later than 62 8.c., when Cicero refers 
to Tarentum as a municipium (pro Archia, 5: 10). Yet Tarentum 
could be called a municipality at any time after the Social war, 
and the date of the speech for Archias is not necessarily a post quod 
non (cf. Hardy, Six Roman Laws, 104). It is possible that the 
charter was given as a result of Pompey’s act in establishing some 
of the eastern pirates on the site of the old Roman colony (cf. Momm- 
sen, Ges. Schr. 1, 151, n. 18). In this case the /ex would date from 
the year 59 when Pompey’s acts were finally ratified. 

The extant portion of the charter deals with the peculation of 
public, sacred, and religious funds (ll. 1-6). In ll. 7-25 the charter 
provides for the cautio of magistrates (cf. no. 65, chap. 70). Since 
the first magistrates could not furnish securities to their prede- 
cessors, they were required to give them to quattuorvirs, who may 
have been the commissioners sent out from Rome (Mommsen, 
op. cit. 1, 156), or the clause may mean that the first magistrates 
gave a cautio to their colleagues in turn (Hardy, op. czt. 106, n. 2). 

The members of the local curia are required to own a house 
within the territory of the municipality, and this dwelling must 
have not less than 1500 tiles on the roof. For this method of 
estimating property, cf. the tax paid by Roman senators in 43 B.c. 
of 4 obols for each tile (Cass. Dio, 46. 31). The law regarding the 
demolition of houses (ll. 32-38), and that regarding the right of 
officials to do paving or to dig drains (Il. 39-42) may be found with 
slight changes in the charter of Urso (no. 26, chapp. 75, 77). The 
clause contained in ll. 43 ff: was designed to check ex-officials from 
leaving the.city before they had discharged all the liabilities which 


might have been incurred in the performance of their office. 


21. LEX GABINIA CALPURNIA DE DELIIS 
(58 a. Chr.) 


Durrbach, Chotx @inscr. Délos, 163; Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 335. 

A. Gabinius A. f. Capito cos., L. Calpurnius L. f. Piso cos. de 
s(enatus) s(ententia) populum iuure rogavere populusque iuure scivit. . 
pro aede Castor(is) a(nte) d(iem) vr ka/(endas) (mensis). Tribus. . 
principium fuit, A. Gabinius A. f. Capito pro tribu primus scivit : || 

5 Velitis iubeatis. Quom res publica pot. ..divinis. . bus ac consilieis 


[ 284 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES . 


sit aucta quomque....clarissumae cCelvitatis sit confirmata.... 
decorata, in quo numero fanum Apollinis....antiquissumum ac 
religiosissumum sit constitutum. .||..em et sanctitatem caerimoni- 
asq(ue) pr... .De/um insulam, in qua insula Apollinem et Dianam 
natos esse arbitrantur?, vecteigalibus leiberari, quae insula post 
hominum memoriam semper fuit? regum ceivitatium nationumque 
imperieis sacra leibera tmmunis? quomque praedones, quei orbem 
terrarum .complureis annos vexarint? || fana delubra simu/acra 
deorum immorfalium loca religioszssuma devastarint, lege Gabinia 
superatei ac deletei sent, et omneis relzgua praeter insuf‘am Delum 
sedes Apollinis ac Dianae in anteiguom splendorem sit restztuta popu- 
leique Romani dignifatis maiestatisgue causa? pulcherrume adminis- 
trata, imperio amp/ificato pace per orbem terrarum || i/lam insulam 
nobilissumam ac samctissumam deis immortalibus restitui? et in- 
sulam lezberari. Neve... ..sit. . .quom vectigal eius. . ¢diudicatione 
quam I. C. A...sup. (?) Delei feceruzt..., neve quid aliud vec- 
teigal neve pro custodia publicei frument: neve quis postea insulas 
illas vicinas quae circum De/um tacent || Artemeitam C. Jadeam.... 
as locet neve...et eas insulas faciat. .quet (t) Delum incolunt 
queique postea incolent vectezgal...iure insulas?....verunt, fue- 
runt... Mitridates in...m iure insula Delus guezqgue eam incolent 
SInth Cage .Delumque ad...Delum queique 
eam incolent insulasve quae s(upra) s(criptae) s(unt)...sei eius 
familia pecuniave plus minus dimznuta sit. ..ere populei plebzsve . 
it magistratus prove magistratu. ua iudicatioque...interced... 
quominul||s setiusve d(e) e(a) r(e) iudicetur sive iudicium fiat liceto. 
S(i) s(acrum) s(anctum) e(st) q(uod) m(on) z(ure) s(tt) r(ogatum), 
e(zus) h(ac) U(ege) n(hil) r(ogatur). 

_ [Adros DP ]JaBeivios Adnov v[tos Katritay] tr[atos cal Aevxios 
Kandzrovpuos Aevxilov..viols Hetowv trrato[s..... | dexat]ws 
éxvpwloe....||...mpo juep lov && xadlavodv...... 

From Delos. The date of the document is fixed by the names of 
the consuls at the head of the Greek text. The law was passed by 
the senate and confirmed by the comuitia tributa (Cuq, B.C.H. 
46 (1922), 201 ff.). Delos had suffered severely under Mithradates 
and from the raids of the pirates until Pompey cleared the latter 
from the seas. The Delians were granted immunity from certain 


[ 285 ] 








Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


oo 


40 


40 


45 


590 


55 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


taxes—probably the tithes,—and from the accessory expense of 
convoying or transporting grain to Rome., The island was also 
made free although it was still under the control of Athens (Cuq, 
loc. cit. 209 ff.). The implications of this law are interesting. Delos, 
although under Athenian jurisdiction, seems to have paid tribute 
to Rome before the passage of the Gabinian law; otherwise the 
gift of immunity is meaningless. Similarly the Caunians paid tribute 
to Rome and Rhodes; cf. Dio Chrys. 31. 1253; see also Livy, 41. 6; 
and Cic. ad fam. 13. 56. 

The interpretation of Il. 30 ff. is uncertain. Apparently those 
who had suffered in the late wars and raids were given the right 
to appeal to Roman magistrates in preference to local or Athenian 
judges for the settlement of claims (cf. no. 19, col. uy, Il. 1 ff). 
Cug points out (foc. cit. 210 ff.) that this provision indicates the 
policy of the Roman senate in binding cities to Rome, even though 
they enjoyed the status of czvitates liberae, by giving them the 
advantages of appealing to Roman law and of being protected by 
Roman magistrates. 3 


22. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE AD PROVINCIALES 
(ca. 56-50 a. Chr.) 


Knackfuss, Das Rathaus von Milet, p. 101, ll. 38 ff. 

ee DAS ry cele ér axupoce aly] aveidi[nde cat Madp|xac] 
Kixép[ov |e cuvtvyav evyapiornce [Ta tax ]|\Oévta érr[euleros 
cuvTnpav ta ém éulot ur dca(?) ||Avew. “Oley ras duels THY 
Tiwv mept [tTavta a]|vaidevay avécynobe, teOavpaxa: Su as 

Shig4 / \ N aA € Me / \ 
[arias] | wpds te TO Kowvdv Tov ‘EAXHVOY yéypada, [pos | 
v]uas, “Edectous, Tpardavots, “AXaBavédeis, M[v||\]aceis, 
Lpupvaiovs, Llepyaunvots, Lapdcavo[vs], | “Adpauutnvods, va 
Te vmels pos Tas év THe O[towlx]joes THe idiar ores SiaTro- 

/ ” la) > / / é4 / 
oteiAnobe €v Te Tat er[t]| pavertatas TOTwL ev oTUAOTApacTabL 
> \ LO lal > aA 1g lal \ 
émt | AiGov revKod evyapayOjvar ppovticnte t[lad]||ta Ta 
ypappata, wa Kowas tTaone THe emapyetale TO] | Sixacov 
éxTapévov Hb eis TOV del Xpovov, ai Te AX|AaL TaGaL TONELS Kal 
Ofjot TO avtov Tap avtois | mouowow, eis Te TA Snudora 
’ a / \ / \ \ | 
atoGa@vTat vouolpuvaAd]|kia Kat ypnwatiorypia. Try 8é aitiav 
dv jv “HAAg[ve]||Kots éypanva, un érelntionte: Kata vobv yap 


[ 286 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


[éo]|yov, ur} Te Tapa THY Epunveiav EXacaor Ta [yeypap| pu léva 
vonoar dvvnabe> thy Sé étiatoAn[y edaxa | Te|woxrHe “Avaka- 
yopov xal Yworxpatne Iv[Oiwvos | mplecBevtais Mayvynter 
Tav mpos tTL@t Mardy||dp lor. "EppwaGe. 

This inscription comes from Miletus. A fragment of the same 
letter is published in Inschriften von Priene, 106. Unfortunately 
both inscriptions are so fragmentary that the purpose of the letter 
cannot be determined. It is evident, however, that it was directed 
to the xowov of Greeks throughout the province, and probably 
contained regulations to be enforced uniformly throughout the 
district. In ll. 46 f. we have a reference to the regzones into which 
the province was divided by Sulla for administrative purposes 
(Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 339). It is interesting to note that the 
writer explains his motive in publishing his edict in Greek instead 
of Latin (ll. 54 ff). This might imply that letters and edicts issued 
by the Romans in the Greek provinces had hitherto been published 
in Latin, but, if so, they had been translated into Greek before they 
were recorded on stone in most cases where such records are found 
(cf. no. 65a). The governor also requires that copies of his letter 
be preserved in the proper archives in cities where copies were not 
engraved on stone. 


23. PERGAMENI HONORANT PUBLIUM 
SERVILIUM ISAURICUM 
(ca. 46 a. Chr.) 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 449; Fraenkel, 4/terthiimer von Pergamon, 413. 

‘O Simos éripnoev | Llomdcov Lepotdcov LlomdAtov viov 
Ioavp.|xov, Tov avOvTratov, yeyovota awtipa Kal | evepyéerny 
THS TOAEWS Kal aTrodedwKOTA THE || TONEL TOUS TraTpioUs VoLoUS 
kai THY SnpoKkpa|tiav adovdwrTov. 

From Pergamum. The reforms in provincial government intro- 
duced by Caesar brought great relief to the provinces suffering from 
the exactions of the publicanz. When Pergamum lost the right to 
use her own laws is unknown. Other inscriptions from Asia indi- 
cate the gratitude of the cities and the relief which they experienced 
under the new régime (cf. Inschriften von Magnesia, 1423; Ditt. Or. 
Gr. 450). 


[ 287 ] 


60 


Io 


I5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


24. TABULA HERACLEENSIS, VULGO 
LEX IULIA MUNICIPALIS 
(45 a. Chr.) 


CIL. 1, 206; Bruns, 18; Dessau, 6085; Girard, p. 80; Ricco- 
bono, p. 109. 

te iis Quem h(ac) I(ege) ad co(n)s(ulem) profiterei oportebit, sei 
is, quom eum profiterei oportebit, Romae non erit, tum quei elus | 
negotia curabit, is ea@dem omnia, quae eum, quoius negotia curabit, 
sei Romae esset, h. |. profiterei | oporteret, item isdemque diebus 
ad cos. profitemino. | 

Quem h. I. ad cos. profiterei oportebit, sei is pup(illus) seive ea 
pu(pilla) erit, tum quei eius pup(illi) pu(pillae)ve tutor erit, item 
eadem||que omnia in iisdem diebus ad cos. profitemino, ita utei ef 
quae quibusque diebus eum eamve, sei pup(illus) pu(pilla)ve non | 
esset, h. 1. profiterei oporteret. | 

Sei cos., ad quem h. |. professiones fiere1 oportebit, Romae non 
erit, tum is, quem profiterei oportebit, quod eum profiterei | opor- 
tebit, ad pr(aetorem) ur(banum) aut, sei is Romae non erit, ad eum 
pr(aetorem), quei inter peregrinos ius deicet, profitemzno, ita utei | 
eum ad cos., sei tum Romae esset, h. |. profiterei oporteret. || 

Sei ex eis cos, et pr(aetoribus), ad quos h. |. professiones fierei 
oportebit, nemo eorum Romae erit, tum Is, quem profiterei opor- 
tebit, | quod eum profiterei oportebit, ad tr(ibunum) pl(ebei) pro- 
fitemino, ita utez eum ad cos. pr(aetorem)gue urb(anum) eumque 
quel inter peregri|nos ius deicet, sei tum Romae esset, h. |. profiterei 
oporteret. | 

Quod quemquem h. 1. profiterei oportebit, is, apud quem ea 
professio fiet, eius quez profitebitur nomen, et ea quae pro|fessus 
erit, et quo die professus sit, in tabulas publicas referunda curato, 
eademque omnia, quae uteique in tabulas || rettulerit, zta in tabulam 
in album referunda | curato, idque aput forum, et quom frumentum 
populo dabitur, ibei ubei frumen|tum populo dabitur, cottidie 
maiorem partem diei propositum habeto, u(nde) d(e) p(lano) r(ecte) 
l(egi) p(ossit). | 

Queiquomque frumentum populo dabrt damdumve curabit, nei 
quoz eorum, quorum nomina h. |. ad cos. pr(aetorem) tr(ibunum) 


Biezeretad 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


pl(ebei) in ta|bula in albo proposita erunt, framentum dato neve 
dare iubeto neve sinito. Quei adversus ea eorum quai frumentum | 
dederit, is in tr(itici) m(odios) 1 Hs 1999 populo dare damnas esto, 
elusque pecuniae quel volet petitio esto. || 

Quae viae in urbe Rom(a) propiusve u(rbem) R(omam) p(assus) 
M, ubei continente habitabitur, sunt erunt, quoius ante aedificium 
earum quae | via erét, is eam viam arbitratu eius aed(ilis), quoi ea 
pars urbis h. |, obvenerit, tueatur; isque aed(ilis) curato, uti, quorum | 
ante aedificium erit, quamque viam h. |. quemque tueri oportebit, 
ei omnes eam viam arbitratu eius tueantur, neve eo | loco agua 
consistat, quominus conmode populus ea via utatur. | 

Aed(iles) cur(ules) aed(iles) pl(ebei), quel nunc sunt, queiquomque 
post h. |. r(ogatam) factei createi erunt eumve mag(istratum) in- 
ierint, iel in diebus v proxumeis, || quibus eo mag(istratu) designatei 
erunt eumve mag(istratum) inierint, inter se paranto aut sortiunto, 
qua in partei urbis quisque | eorum vias publicas in urbe Roma, 
propiusve u(rbem) R(omam) p(assus) M, reficiundas sternendas curet, 
elusque rei procurationem | habeat. Quae pars quoique aed(ile1) 
ita h. ]. obvenerit, eius aed(ilis) in eis loceis quae in ea partei erunt 
viarum reficien|darum tuemdarum procuratio esto, utei h. |. opor- 
tebit. | 

Quae via inter aedem sacram et aedificium locumve publicum 
et inter aedificium privatum est erit, eius || viae partem dimidiam is 
aed(ilis), quoi ea pars urbis obvenerit, in qua parte ea aedis sacra erit 
seive aedificium | publicum seive locus publicus, tuemdam locato. | 

OQuemquomque ante suum aedificium viam publicam h. |. tueri 
oportebit, quel eorum eam viam arbitratu eius aed(ilis), | quoius 
oportuerit, non tuebitur, eam viam aed(ilis), quoius arbitratu eam 
tuerel oportuerit, tuemdam locato; | isque aed(ilis) diebus ne minus 
X, antequam locet aput forum ante tribanale suom propositum 
habeto, quam || viam tuendam et quo die locaturus sit, ef quorum 
ante aedificium ea via sit; elsque, quorum ante aedificium | ea via 
erit, procuratoribusve eorum domum denuntietur facito, se eam 
viam locaturum, et quo die locaturus | sit; eamque locationem 
palam in foro per q(uaestorem) urb(anum), eumve quei aerario 
praerit, facito. Quamta pecunia eam | viam locaverit, tamtae 
pecuniae. eum eosque, quorum ante aedificium ea via erit pro 


AMA [ 289 ] 19 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


55 


60 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


portioni, quamtum | quoiusque ante aedificium viae in longitudine 
et in latitudine erit, q(uaestor) urb(anus), queive aerario praerit, in 
tabulas || publicas pecuniae factae referundum curato. Ei quei eam 
viam tuemdam redemerit, tamtae pecuniae eum eos|ve adtribuito 
sine d(olo) m(alo). Sei is, quei adtributus erit, eam pecuniam diebus 
XXX proxumeis, quibus ipse aut pro|curator eius sciet adtributionem 
factam esse ei, guoi adtributus erit, non solverit neque satis fecerit, 
is | quamtae pecuniae adtributus erit, tamtam pecuniam et eius 
dimidium ei, quoi adtributus erit, dave debeto, | inque eam rem is, 
quo quomque de ea re aditum erit, iudicem iudiciumve ita dato, utei 
de pecunia credita || zwdicem iudiciumve dari oporteret. | 

Quam viam h. |. tuemdam locari oportebit, aed(ilis), quem eam 
viam tuendam locare oportebit, is eam viam per | q(uaestorem) 
urb(anum), queive aerario praerit, tuemdam locato, utei eam viam 
arbitratu eius, quel eam viam locandam | curaverit, tueatur. Quam- 
tam pecuniam ita quaeque via locata erit, t(amtam) p(ecuniam) 
q(uaestor) urb(anus), queive aerario praerit, | redemptorei, quoi e 
lege locationis dari oportebit, heredeive eius damdam adtribuendam 
curato. || 

Quo minus aed(iles) et murvir(ei) vieis in urbem purgandeis, 
Irvir(el) viels extra propiusve urbem Rom(am) passus ™ | purgandeis, 
queiquomque erunt, vias publicas purgandas curent elusque rel 
potestatem habeant, | ita utei legibus pl(ebei)ve sc(itis) s(enatus)ve 
c(onsultis) oportet oportebit, ezus h. |. n@hilum) r(ogatur). | 

Quoius ante aedificium semita in loco erit, is eam semitam, eo 
aedificio perpetuo lapidibus perpetueis | integreis continentem, con- 
stratam recte habeto arbitratu eius aed(ilis), quoius in ea parte h. |. 
viarum || procuratzo erit. | 

Quae viae in u(rbe) R(oma) sunt erunt intra ea loca, ubi con- 
tinenti habstabztur, ne quis in ieis vieis post k. Januar. | primas 
plostrum interdiu post solem ortum, neve ante horam x diei ducito 
agito, nisi quod aedium | sacrarum deorum inmortalium caussa 
aedificandarum, operisve publice faciumdei causa advehei porta|ri 
oportebit, aut quod ex urbe exve ieis loceis earum rerum, quae 
publice demoliendae locatae erunt, publi||ce exportarei oportebit, et 
quarum rerum caussa plostra h. |. certeis hominibus certeis de 
causeis agere | ducere licebit. | 


[ 290 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Quibus diebus virgines Vestales regem sacrorum, flamines plos- 
treis in urbe sacrorum publicorum p(opuli) R(omani) caussa | vehi 
oportebit, quaeque plostra triumphi caussa, quo die quisque trium- 
phadit, ducei oportebit, quaeque | plostra ludorum, quei Romae aut 
urbei Romae p(ropius) p(assus) m publice feient, inve pompam 
ludeis circiensibus ducei agei opus || erit; quo minus earum rerum 
caussa eisque diebus plostra interdiu in urbe ducantur agantur, 
e(ius) h(ac) l(ege) n(ihilum) r(ogatur). | 

Quae plostra noctu in urbem inducta erunt, quo minus ea plostra 
inania aut stercoris exportandei caussa | post solem ortum h(oris) x 
diei bubus iumenteisve iuncta in u(rbe) R(oma) et ab u(rbe) R(oma) 
p(assus) M esse liceat, e(ius) h. 1. n(@jhilum) rogatur. | 

Quae loca publica porticusve publicae in u(rbe) R(oma) p(ropius)- 
ve u(rbei) R(omae) p(assus) M sunt erunt, quorum locorum quoius- 
que porticus | aedilium eorumve mag(istratuom), quei vieis loceisque 
publiceis u(rbis) R(omae) p(ropius)ve u(rbei) R(omae) p(assus) M 
purgandeis praerunt, legibus || procuratio est erit, nel quis in leis 
loceis inve ieis porticibus quid in aedificatum inmolitwmve habeto, | 
neve ea loca porticumve quam possideto, neve eorum quod saeptum 
clausumve habeto, quo minus eis | loceis porticibusque populus 
utatur pateantve, nisi quibus uteique leg(ibus) pl(ebei)ve sc(itis) 
s(enatus)ve c(onsultis) concessum permissumve est. | 

Quibus loceis ex lege locationis, quam censor aliusve quis mag- 
(istratus) publiceis vectigalibus ultrove tributeis | fruendeis tuendeisve 
dixet, dixerit, eis, quei ea fruenda tuendave conducta habebunt, ut 
utei fruei liceat || gut utei ea ab eis custodiantur, cautum est; €i 
quo minus ieis loceis utantur fruantur ita, utei quoique eorum | ex 
lege locationis ieis seve d(olo) m(alo) utei fruei licebit, ex h. |. n(ihilum) 
r(ogatur). | 

Quos lud(os) quisque Romae p(ropius)ve u(rbei) R(omae) p(assus) 
M faciet, quo minus ei eorum ludorum caussa scaenam pulpitum 
ceteraque, | quae ad eos ludos opus erunt, in loco publico ponere 
statuere, eisque diebus, quibus eos faciet, loco publico utei | liceat, 
e(ius) h. 1. n(ihilum) r(ogatur). || 

Quei scribae librarei magistratibus apparebunt, ei quo minus 
loceis publiceis, ubei is, guoz quisque eorum apparebunt, | iuserit, 
apparendi caussa utantur, e(ius) h.l. n(ihilum) r(ogatur). | 


[ 291 ] 19-2 


65 


7O 


75 


80 


85 


gO 


95 


I0O 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Quae loca serveis publiceis ab cens(oribus) habitandei utendei 
caussa adtributa sunt, ei quo minus eis loceis utantur, e(ius) h. |. 
n(ihilum) r(ogatur). | 

Queiquomque in municipieis coloneis praefectureis foreis con- 
ciliabuleis c(ivium) R(omanorum) rvir(el) r11Vvir(ei) erunt aliove | 
quo nomine mag(istratum) potestatemve sufragio eorum, quel 
quoiusque municip# coloniae praefecturae || forz conciliabuli erunt 
habebunt: nei quis eorum quem in eo municipio colonia praefectura 
foro concilia|bulo zz senatum decuriones conscriptosve legito neve 
sublegito neve coptato neve recitandos curato, | nisi in demortuei 
damnateive locum eiusve, quei confessus erit, se senatorem de- 
curionem conscreiptumve | ibei h. 1. esse non licere. | 

Quei minor annos xxx natus est erit, nel quis eorum post k. 
Ianuar. secundas in municipio colonia praefe||ctura rvir(atum) 
IllIvir(atum) neve quem alium mag(istratum) petito neve capito 
neve gerito, nisei quel eorum stipendia | equo in legione 111, aut 
pedestria in legione vi fecerit, quae stipendia in castreis inve pro- 
vincia maiorem | partem sui quoiusque anni fecerit, aut bina semes- 
tria, quae ei pro singuleis annzeis procedere oporteat, | aut ei vocatzo 
rei militaris legibus pl(ebei)ve sc(itis) exve foidere erit, quocirca 
eum inveitum merere non | oporteat. Neve quis, quez praeconium 
dissignationem libitinamve faciet, dum eorum quid faciet, in muni-|| 
cipio colonia praefectura tvir(atum) 1ivir(atum) aliumve quem 
mag(istratum) petito neve capito neve gerito neve habeto, | neve 
ibei senator neve decurio neve conscriptus esto, neve sententiam 
dicito. Quei eorum ex eis, quei s(upra) s(criptei) s(unt), | adversus 
ea fecerit, is HS 1990 p(opulo) d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque pe- 
cuniae quei volet petitio esto. | 

Queiquomque in municipio colonia praefectura post k. Quinct- 
(iles) prim(as) comitia r1vir(eis) 1zzvir(eis) aleive quoi mag(istratui) | 
rogando subrogandove habebit, is ne quem, quei minor anneis 
XXX natus est erit, lvir(um), w1vir(um), queive ibei || alium 
mag(istratum) habeat, renuntiato neve renuntiarei iubeto, nisi quei 
stipendia equo in legione 111, aut stilpendia pedestria in legione vr 
fecerit, quae stipendia in castreis inve provincia maiorem partem 
sui | quoiusque anni fecerit, aut bina semestria, quae ei pro singuleis 
annuels procedere oporteat, cum eo | quod ei legibus pl(eibei)ve 


[ 292 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


sc(iteis) procedere oportebit, aut ei vocatio rei militaris legibus 
pl(ebei)ve sc(iteis) exve foedere | erit, quo circa eum invitum merere 
non oporteat. Neve eum, quei praeconium dissignationem libiti- 
namve faciet, dum eorum quid || faciet, 11vir(um) m11vir(um), queive 
ibei mag(istratus) sit, renuntiato, neve in senatum neve in de|curi- 
onum conscriptorumve numero legito, sublegito coptato neve sen- 
tentiam rogato neve dicere neve | ferre iubeto sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). 
Quei adversus ea fecerit, is Hs 1999 p(opulo) d(are) d(amnas) esto, 
elusque pecuniae quel volet petitio esto. | 

Quae municipia coloniae praefecturae fora conciliabula c(ivium) 
R(omanorum) sunt erunt, nei quis in eorum quo municipio | 
colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo zz senatu decurionibus con- 
screipteisque esto, neve quoz ibi in eo ordine || sentemtiam deicere 
ferre liceto: quei furtei, quod ipse fecit fecerit, condemnatus pactusve 
est erit; | queive iudicio fiduciae pro socio, tutelae, mandatel, in- 
iuriarum, deve d(olo) m(alo) condemnatus est erit; queive lege | 
Plaetoria ob eamve rem, quod adversus eam legem feczt fecerit, 
condemnatus est erit; queive depugnandei | caussa auctoratus est 
erit fuit fuerit; queive | in iure Jonam copiam abiuravit abiuraverit, 
bonamve copiam iuravit iuraverit; queive sponsoribus creditoribusve 
sueis renuntiavit renuntiaverit, se soldum solvere non posse, aut 
cum eis || pactus est erit, se soldum solvere non posse; prove quo 
datum depensum est erit; quoiusve bona ex edicto | eius, quei z(wre) 
d(eicundo) praefuit praefuerit, praeterquam sei quoius, quom pu- 
pillus esset reive publicae caussa abesset, | neque d(olo) m(alo) fecit 
fecerit quo magis r(ei) p(ublicae) c(aussa) a(besset), possessa pro- 
scriptave sunt erunt; queive iudicio publico Romae | condemnatus 
est erit, quo circa eum in Italia esse non liceat, neque in integrum 
resti¢utus est erit; queive in eo | municipio colonia praefectura foro 
conciliabulo, quoius erit, iudicio publico condemnatus est erit; 
quemve || k(alumniae) praevaricationis caussa accussasse fecisseve 
quod iudicatum est erit; quoive aput exercitum ingnominiae | caussa 
ordo ademptus est erit; quemve imperator ingnominiae caussa ab 
exercitu decedere iuszt iuserit; | queive ob caput c(ivis) R(omanei) 
referundum pecuniam praemium aliudve quid cepit ceperit; queive 
corpore quaestum | fecit fecerit; queive lanistaturam artemve ludi- 
cram fecit fecerit; queive lenocinium faciet. Quei | adversus ea 


[ 293 ] 


105 


Ito 


115 


I20 


125 


130 


135 


140 


145 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


in municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo im senatu de- 
curionibus conscripteisve fuerit || sentemtiamve dixerit, is Hs 1999 
p(opulo) d(are) d(amnas) esto, eiusque pecuniae quei voletpetitio esto. | 

Quoi h. |. in municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo 
senatorem decurionem conscriptum esse, | inque eo ordine sentem- 
tiam dicere ferre non licebit, nei quis, quei in eo municipio colonia 
praefectura | foro conciliabulo senatum decuriones conscriptos 
habebit, eum in senatum decuriones conscriptos | ire iubeto sc(iens) 
d(olo) m(alo); neve eum ibei sentemtiam rogato neive dicere neive 
ferre iubeto sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo); neve quis, quez || in eo municipio 
colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo sufragio eorum maxumam 
potestatem habebit, | eorum quem ibei in senatum decuriones con- 
scriptos ire, neve in eo numero esse neve sentemtiam ibei dicere | 
ferreve sinito sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo); neve quis eius rationem comi- 
tieis conciliove habeto, netve quis quem, set adversus ea comtttets 
conciliove creatum est renuntiato; neve quis, | quei ibei mag(istratum) 
potestatemve habebit, eum cum senatu decurionibus conscriptezs 
/udos spectare neive in convivio | publico esse sinzto sc(iens) d(olo) 
m<(alo). || 

Quibus h. |. in municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo 
in senatu decurionibus conscripteis esse | non licebit, ni quis eorum 
in municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo tvir(atum) 
I1Ivir(atum) aliamve | quam potestatem ex quo honore in eum 
ordinem perveniat, petito neve capito; neve quis eorum ludeis, | 
cumve gladiatores ibei pugnabunt, in loco senatorio decurionum 
conscriptorum sedeto neve spectato | neve convivium publicum is 
inito; neive quis, quel adversus ea creatus renuntiatus erit, ibei 
IIvir 111Ivir || esto, neve ibei m(agistratum) potestatemve habeto. 
Quez adversus ea fecerit, is HS 1999 p(opulo) d(are) d(amnas) esto, 
elusque pecuniae quei | volet petitio esto. | 

Quae municipia coloniae praefecturae c(ivium) R(omanorum) in 
Italia sunt erunt, quei in eis municipieis coloneis | praefectureis 
maximum mag(istratum) maximamve potestatem ibei habebit tum, 
cum censor aliusve | quis mag(istratus) Romae populi censum aget, 
is diebus 1x proxumeis, quibus sciet Romae censum populi |] agi, 
omnium municipium colonorum suorum queique elus praefecturae 
erunt, q(uel) c(ives) R(omanei) erunt, censum | ag/to, eorumque 


[ 294 ]| 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


nomina praenomina, patres aut patronos, tribus, cognomina, et quot 
annos | quisque eorum habet, et rationem pecuniae ex formula 
census, quae Romae ab eo, qui tum censum | populi acturus erit, 
proposita erit, ad ieis iurateis accipito; eaque omnia in tabulas publicas 
sul | municipi referunda curato; eosque libros per legatos, quos 
maior pars decurionum conscriptorum || ad eam rem legarei mitte! 150 
censuerint tum, cum ea res consuleretur, ad eos, quel Romae censum 
agent, | mittito; curatoque, utei quom amplius dies Lx reliquei erunt, 
ante quam diem ei, queiquomque Romae | censum ager, finem 
populi cezsendi faciant, eos adeazt librosque eius municipi coloniae 
praefecturae | edant; isque censor, seive quis alius mag(istratus) 
censum populi aget, diebus v proxumeis, quibus legatei eius | 
municipi coloniae praefecturae adierint, eos libros census, quei ab 
ieis legateis dabuntur, accipito || s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) exque ieis 155 
libreis, quae ibei scripta erunt, in tabulas publicas referunda curato, 
easque tabulas | eodem loco, ubei ceterae tabulae publicae erunt, in 
quibus census populi perscriptus erit, condendas curato. | 

Qui pluribus in municipieis coloneis praefectureis domicilium 
habebit, et is Romae census erit, quo magis | in municipio colonia 
praefectura h. 1. censeatur, e(1us) h. 1. n(ihilum) r(gatur). | 

Quei lege pl(ebeive) sc(ito) permissus est fuit, utei leges in muni- 
cipio fundano municipibusve eius municipi daret, || sei quid is post 160 
h. |. r(ogatam) in eo anno proxumo, quo h. 1. populus iuserit, ad eas 
leges addiderit commutaverit conrexerit, municipzs fundanos | item 
teneto, utei oporteret, sei eae res ab eo tum, quom primum leges 
eis municipibus lege pl(ebei)ve sc(ito) dedit, | ad eas leges additae 
commutatae conrectae essent; neve quis intercedzto neve quid 
facito, quo minus | ea rata sint, quove minus municipis fundanos 
teneant eisque optemperetur. 


]. 19. 1 2.¢. singulos. 

]. 29. via inter; viam per, tad/et. 

]. 64. ludorum, sc. caussa. 

]. 92. oporteat; cum eo quod ei legibus plebeive sciteis procedere oportebit, 
omitted. Cf. ll. 102-103. 

]. 117. abesset; Mommsen and Dessau add bona possessa proscriptave sunt 
erunt. 


[ 295 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


A very large bronze tablet, with a more ancient Greek in- 
scription on the back of it. It is broken into two parts. ‘The lower 
part (Il. 76-163) was found near the site of Heraclea in 1732. The 
upper part was discovered in 1754. Both parts are now in the 
museum at Naples. The beginning of the law has been lost. “The 
date of the inscription is fixed approximately or exactly from a 
letter of Cicero (ad fam. 6. 18. 1). In this letter he writes to Lepta, 
simulatque accept a Seleuco tuo litteras, statim quaesivi e Balbo per 
codicillos, quid esset in lege. Rescripsit eos, quit facerent praeconium, 
vetari esse in decurtonibus; qui fecissent, non vetart. The provision 
mentioned here is the exact point covered in our law (1. 94), and 
Cicero is evidently referring to this measure. He has obtained 
information in advance from an intimate friend of Caesar con- 
cerning the bill about to be submitted, which has not yet been 
promulgated. The date of Cicero’s letter, Jan. 45 B.c., fixes the 
probable date of the law as 45 B.c. on Caesar’s return from Spain 
(cf. Mommsen in Bruns, p. 102). For arguments in favor of the 
year 46, cf. Nissen, Rh. Mus. 45 (1890), 100 ff, Hackel, Wien. 
Stud. 24 (1902), 552, and others. Since Savigny’s time (cf. Verm. 
Schr. 3, 279 ff.) it has commonly been believed that this measure 
was intended to provide a normal charter for Italian towns. This 
conclusion was based largely upon certain apparent references in 
the Civil Law (cf. especially, Cod. F. 7. 9. 1; Dig. 50. 9. 3) toa 
general /ex municipalis, which was identified with Caesar’s measure, 
but most scholars have abandoned this identification (cf. however, 
Hardy, Six Roman Laws, 139 ff, 165 ff.) Mommsen has gone so 
far (Ges. Schr. 1, 153) as to deny the existence of a model charter 
at any period whatsoever, but cf. pp. 185 ff. 

The extant tablet covers four different matters, with a supple- 
mentary provision (Il. 159-163) ratifying such changes as the com- 
missioners may make in the measure during the first year after its 
adoption. ‘Uhese four subjects are: (1) rules governing the distribu- 
tion of corn in Rome (ll. 1-19); (2) regulations determining the 
duties of theaediles and other officials in Rome inrepairing, cleaning, 
and policing the streets (Il. 20-82); (3) conditions governing the 
eligibility of candidates for the magistracies and the senate (Il. 83— 
141); (4) provisions regulating the taking of the census in the 


[ 296 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


municipality (ll. 142-158). It is very difficult to account for the 
appearance, on a single tablet, of laws dealing with such diverse 
matters as the corn supply and the functions of the aedile, and 
concerning Rome as well as Italian municipalities (cf. Herzog, 
2, I, n. 1). Perhaps we have on the tablet parts of three different 
laws, viz. part of a municipal charter, and parts of two laws dealing 
with the corn supply and the aedile’s duties in Rome. The theory 
that the law is a /ex satura (Savigny, op. cit. 3, 327 ff-; de Petra, 
Mon. ant. d. Lincei, 6 (1895), 433 ff.) has been given up by most 
scholars. Still others believe that the law is a unit, being part of a 
comprehensive measure intended for Rome as well as for the Italian 
municipalities. Possibly, if we accept the first of these three theories 
mentioned above, we may surmise that we have on the tablet a 
municipal charter as the piéce de résistance, to which is added an 
article concerning the corn supply for the information of a muni- 
cipality, and a chapter prescribing the duties of a Roman aedile to 
serve as a guide for the municipal magistracy (cf. Herzog, Joc. cit.). 
Whatever relation the different parts of the inscription have to one 
another, from |. 83 on we have part of an early municipal charter 
which deals with the local executives and the local senate. Cf. no. 20. 
For the judicial powers of local magistrates, cf. no. 27. 

It seems probable from a comparison of |. 83 with Il. 89-90 
that fora and conctliabula had local magistrates, but that these 
magistrates did not bear the title of duoviri or of quattuorviri. On 
similar grounds we infer (cf. Il. 142 ff.) that the census was not 
taken in fora and conciliabula. (For another list of communities, 
cf. no. 27, chap. xxu.) Although criminal courts held in fora and 
conciliabula are mentioned in Il. 118-119, they cannot have been 
presided over by local magistrates (cf. Schulten, R.F. 7, 63), but 
must have been conducted by praefectt sent from larger com- 
munities. From ll. 83-88 it is clear that magistrates were to be 
elected in the popular assembly, and that decurions could be named 
by the magistrates. On the technical terms in |. 86, cf, Mommsen, 
St. R. 3, 855 f.and nn. Apparently decurions could also be elected 
in the popular assembly (cf. 1. 132). 

Rome required the census to be taken in Italian towns as early 
as 209 B.c. (Livy, 29. 15), but this is the earliest extended formula- 


{ 297 ] 


15 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


tion which we have of the method of procedure. The charter of 
Bantia (no. 11, chap. 4) bears witness to the taking of the census 
in this Oscan town in the second century B.c., and prescribes a 
penalty for those who fail to report themselves. Under the princi- 
pate the census was also required in provincial towns (cf. Kubitschek, 
R.E. 3, 1918 f.). We do not know whether the system outlined 
here originated in Rome or was adopted from other Italian munici- 
palities. The fact that a person might have a domicile in several 
municipalities (1. 157) will be illustrated in concrete cases in later 
inscriptions (cf. no. 94), in which we shall find certain men as 
citizens in several czvitates. ‘The course of procedure which was 
followed in granting this charter is indicated in]. 159. An enabling 
act passed in the popular assembly authorized a commissioner or a 
commission to frame a constitution and, a year after the passage 
of the law, to make any necessary amendments. On the scope of 
this article, cf; Elmore, Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 47 (1916), 40 ff. 
For an extended commentary on the entire document, cf. Legras, 
La table Latine d Héraclée; Elmore, Fourn. Rom. Studtes, 5 (1915), 
125 ff; Hardy, Class. Quart. 11 (1917), 27 ff.; Some Problems in 
Roman History, 239 ff. 


25. SENATUS CONSULTUM ET EPISTULA 
CAESARIS AD MYTILENAEOS 
(45 a. Chr.) 

IG: X11, 2, 35, ll. 14-37; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 33; Ditt. Sy/7.3 764 
(in part). 

[Iept ov wr]pecBevrai Mutirnvaior Morapov AeoBovaxtos, 
Paivias Daiviov tod Kanddi[m]|rov, Sépdhyos Acods, ‘Hpwdns 
Kréwvos, Avis Martpoxdéous, Anuntptos KrXewvipou, || Kpuva- 
yopas KadXitrmov, Zwiros’ Evyévous Noyous érroinocavTo, yapura, 
pirtav, cvppa|yiav aveveodrto, iva te év KarretorXiowe Ovo[l av 
Tomoat €Ent, a TE avTOLS | TpOTEpOY VITO THS TUYKANHTOU cUYKeE- 
xopnu|[élva nv, tadra év dérTwL yarkHe | yeypaupéva rpoc- 
nr@oat iva Eu: mept rovtov Tod mpdypuatos ovTws || &ofev- 
xapita, piriav, cvuppaxiay avaveocacOa, avdpas ayabods Kal 
pi|rous mpocayopetvoan, év Karretwriws Ovoiav moujoar éFetvas, & 
Te avTOLs TpO|TEpov U7r0 THS TUYKAHTOV PiiavOpwra cvyKeywpn- 


[ 298 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


péva Hv, Tadta év SéA|Tw@L YaArKHL yeypappméeva TPoTNAWTAL 
e ” A / 2\ 

éfetvat, drav Oédwowv: iva te Vdios | Kaitoap avtoxpatawp, av 

lal) rn al f 

avTat paivntat, TOTOUS YopHyLa avTols KaTA TO || TOY Tpoyover 
2 a alt ped A 

€O0s Tapiav picOdoar KereVane O(UT)ws WS av avTwl ex TAY 

a) / / 

dn|poclwv mpaypatev Tictews Te THS idias paivntat. “Kdokev. 
[Ez] \ be \ , 2 / t AY Eg \ e a 

et O€ kal | mpdrepov éveTvyYeTE ot Kal éyparya Tpos Upas, 

/ , an 

Tadw wvrréulew]av of | [iuétrepor mpecBevtal pnldéva dev 


atern ei[var] wap’ vpiv axorovO[ws Tois |.......-- Kab Tots | 
diravOpwras a éyete Tap Huav Tois Te [mpdre||pov Kal Tots 
dia TovTOV To |b Soypatos SeSouévois 76 e£etvar bpily...|... Tats | 


THS TOrEwWS Kal TIS Ywepas mpocddats Kal ALovyxiay | yphaGar. 
Bovdopar ody] atrodynvacbar Ste oddevt cvyywpe ovde cvy[Xo- 
pyjlow aterel wap vpiv eivar. Olitas odv memeropévor Oap- 
poovtes yxpnoO[e..|...aveumod|ictws: eyo tatta Te 75éws 
meTroinka wl mép || twav xal evYopas els T]O wéAdOV alEL TLVOS 
aya0od trapaitios byiv [yevérOar]. | 

From Mytilene. The inscription contains the correspondence 
and treaty between Rome and Mytilene. This city had been loyal 
to Pompey, but after the battle of Pharsalia it had sent an embassy 
to Caesar to sue for pardon (cf. Plutarch, Pomp. 75). A second 
embassy was sent to Rome in 45 B.c. to ask forthe renewal of the 
old treaty of alliance. Their request was granted by the senate, and 
Caesar sent this letter to the Mytileneans, of which we publish 
a part. This part includes the decree of the senate renewing the 
treaty and an edict of Caesar wherein he promises the city that no 
resident of Mytilene shall enjoy the privilege of immunity. In spite 
of the fact that this city enjoyed the status of an independent ally 
of Rome, it is apparent that complete autonomy was not implied. 
Since Roman citizens enjoyed special privileges of immunity in the 
cities of the empire, it is probable that the edict of Caesar was 
designed to subject them to the laws, customs, and duties of the 
Mytileneans (cf. p. 192). Mytilene was a free city under Augustus 
(Pliny, N.H. 5, 139). It may have lost its privileges under Vespasian 
(Philostratus, poll. 5, 41), but they were restored by Hadrian. 
Cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d Aste, 118. 


[ 299 ] 


25 


30 


Bh 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


col. Iv 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


26. LEX COLONIAE GENITIVAE IULIAE SEU URSONENSIS 
(44 a. Chr.) 


CIL. u, S. 5439; Dessau, 6087; Bruns, 28; Girard, p. 89; 
Riccobono, p. 142. 


LXI....Cui quis ita ma|num inicere tussus erit, 1udicati 1ure 
ma|nus iniectio esto, itque ei s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) facere liceto. 
Vin|dex arbitratu tviri quive i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) locuples || 
esto. Ni vindicem dabit iudicatumve facilet, secum ducito. Iure 
civili vinctum habeto. | Si quis in eo vim faciet, ast eius vincitur, 
du|pli damnas esto colonisq(ue) eius colon(iae) Hs ccr99 ccI99 | 
d(are) d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae gui volllet petitio, 11vir(o) 
quive i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) exactio iudicati|oque esto. | 

LXII. [lIviri quicumque erunt, izs 11viris in eos singulos | lictores 
binos accensos sing(ulos), scribas bilnos, viatores binos, librarium, 
praeconem, || haruspicem, tibicinem habere ius potestas|que esto. 
Quique in ea colonia aedil(es) erunt, | iis aedil(ibus) in eos aedil(es) 
sing(ulos) scribas sing(ulos), publijcos cum cincto limo m1, prae- 
conem, haruspi|cem tibicinem habere ius potestasq(ue) esto. Ex eo || 
numero, qui eius coloniae coloni erunt, habe|to. lisque r1vir(is) 
aedilibusque, dum eum mag(istratum) ha|bebunt, togas praetextas, 
funalia, cereos ha|bere ius potestasq(ue) esto. Quos quisque eo|rum 
ita scribas lictores accensos viatorem || tibicinem haruspicem prae- 
conem habebit, iis | omnibus eo anno, quo anno quisque eorum | 
apparebit, militiae vacatio esto, neve quis eum eo anno, quo 
mag(istratibus) apparebit, invitum | militem facito neve fieri iubeto 
neve eum || cogito neve ius iurandum adigito neve aldigi iubeto 
neve sacramento rogato neve | rogari iubeto, nisi tumultus Italici 
Gallici|ve causa. Eisque merces in eos singul(os), qui I1vi|ris appare- 
bunt, tanta esto: in scribas sing(ulos) || Hsoo cc, in accensos sing(ulos) 
HS DCC, in lictores | sing(ulos) Hs Dc, in viatores sing(ulos) Hs cccc, 
in libra|rios sing(ulos) Hs ccc, in haruspices sing(ulos) us p, prae|coni 
HS CCC; qui aedilib(us) appareb(unt): in scribas | sing(ulos) Hs pccc, 
in haruspices sing(ulos) us c, in ti] bicines sing(ulos) Hs ccc, in prae- 
cones sing(ulos) Hs ccc. | Tis s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) kapere liceto. | 

LXIII. IIviri, qui primi ad. pr. k. Ianuar. mag(istratum) habe- 
bunt, appari|tores totidem habento guot sing(ulis) apparitores ex h(ac) 


[ 300 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


l(ege) ha||bere licet. Iisque apparitorib(us) merces tanta esto, | 
quantam esse oporteret, si partem III anni appar|uissent, ut pro 
portione, quam diu apparuissent, mer|cedem pro eo kaperent, itque 
lis s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) c(apere) I(iceto). | 

LXIIII. IIviri quicumque post colon(iam) deductam erunt, ii 
in die||bus x proxumis, quibus eum mag(istratum) gerere coeperint, 
at | decuriones referunto, cum non minus duae partes | aderint, quos 
et quot dies festos esse et quae sacra | fieri publice placeat et quos 
ea sacra facere place|at. Quot ex eis rebus decurionum maior pars, 
qui || tum aderunt, decreverint statuerint, it lus ratum|que esto, 
eaque sacra elque ies festi In ea colon(ia) | sunto. | 

LXV. Quae pecunia poenae nomine ob vectiga/ia, quae | 
colon(iae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) erunt, in publicum redacta erit, eam || 
pecuniam ne quis erogare neve cui dare neve attri|buere potestatem 
habeto nisi at ea sacra, quae in | colon(ia) aliove quo loco colonorum 
nomine fiavt, | neve quis aliter eam pecuniam s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) 
kapito, neve quis | de ea pecunia ad decuriones referundi neve quis || 
de ea pecunia sententiam dicendi ius potestat(em)|que habeto. Eam- 
que pecuniam ad ea sacra, quae | in ea colon(ia) aliove quo loco 
colonorum nomine | fient, r1viri s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) dato attribuito 
itque ei facere | ius potestasq(ue) esto. Eique cui ea pecunia dabi||tur 
s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) kapere liceto. | 

LXVI. Quos pontifices quosque augures G. Caesar, quive | 
iussu eius colon(iam) deduxerit, fecerit ex colon(ia) Ge|net(iva), ei 
pontifices eique augures c(oloniae) G/(enetivae) I(uliae) sunto, 
eiq(ue) | ponfifices auguresque in pontificum augu||rum conlegio 
in ea colon(ia) sunto, ita uti qui | optima lege optumo iure in quaque 
colon(ia) | pontif(ices) augures sunt erunt. ITisque pontificibus | 
auguribusque, qui in quoque eorum collegio | erunt, liberisque eorum 
militiae munerisq|ue publici vacatio sacrosancta esto, uti pon|tifici 
Romano est erit, geraque militaria ea omnila merita sunto. De 
auspiciis quaeque ad eas res per|tinebunt augurum iuris dictio iudi- 
catio esto. Eis||que pontificib(us) auguribusque ludis, quot publice 
ma|gistratus facient, et cum ei pontific(es) augures sa|cra publica 
c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) facient, togas praetextas haben|di ius 
potestasq(ue) esto, eisque pontificib(us) augurib(us)|q(ue) ludos 
gladiatoresq(ue) inter decuriones specta||re ius potestasque esto. | 


301 | 


5 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


col. v 


Io 


5 


20 


25 


30 


So 


IO 


T5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


LXVII. Quicumque pontif(ex) quique augur c(oloniae) G(ene- 
tivae) I(uliae) post h(anc) l(egem) da|tam in conlegium pontific(um) 
augurumq(ue) in demor|tui damnative loco h(ac) l(ege) lectus co- 
optatusve erit, | is pontif(ex) augurq(ue) in c(olonia) [ul(ia) in con- 
legium [séc] pontifex || augurq(ue) esto, ita uti qui optuma lege in 
quaque | colon(ia) pontif(ices) auguresq(ue) sunt erunt. Neve quis | 
quem in conlegium pontificum kapito suble|gito cooptato nisi tunc 
cum minus tribus pon|tificib(us) ex ils, qui c(oloniae) G(enetivae) 
sunt, erunt. Neve quis quem || in conlegium augurum sublegito 
cooptato ni|si tum cum minus tribus auguribus ex eis, qui | colon(iae) 
G(enetivae) I(uliae) sunt, erunt. | 

LXVII(I). Ilviri praef(ectus)ve comitia pontific(um) augurum- 
que), quos h(ac) lege | facere oportebit, ita habeto, prodicito, ita 
uti || Itvir(um) creare facere sufficere h(ac) l(ege) o(portebit). | 

LXIX. IIviri qui post colon(iam) deduc¢am primi erunt, ei in 
sulo mag(istratu) et quicumq(ue) Irvir(i) 1n colon(ia) Iul(ia) erunt, 
ii in | diebus Lx proxumis, quibus eum mag(istratum) gerere coe|pe- 
rint, ad decuriones referunto, cum non minus || xx aderunt, uti 
redemptori redemptoribusque, | qui ea redempta habebunt quae ad 
sacra resq(ue) | divinas opus erunt, pecunia ex lege locationis | 
adtribuatur solvaturq(ue). Neve quisquam rem ali|am at decuriones 
referunto neve quot decuri|ljonum decret(um) faciunto antequam 
eis redemp|toribus pecunia ex lege locationis attribuatur | solvaturve 
d(ecurionum) d(ecreto), dum ne minus xxx atsint, cum | e(a) r(es) 


> consulatur. Quot ita decreverint, ei 11vir(i) | redemptori redemptori- 


bus attribuendum | solvendumque curato, dum ne ex ea pecunia | 
solvant adtribuant, quam pecuniam ex h(ac) l(ege) | ad ea sacra, quae 
in colon(ia) aliove quo loco pul|jblice fant, dari adtribui oportebit. | 

(L)XX. Ilviri quicumque erunt praeter eos, qui primi | post 
h(anc) I(egem) facti erunt, <ei> in suo mag(istratu) munus lu]dosve 
scaenicos Iovi lunoni Minervae deis | deabusq(ue) quadriduom 
m(aiore) p(arte) diei, quot elus fie||ri poterit, arbitratu decurionum 
faciun|to inque eis ludis eoque munere unusquis|que eorum de sua 
pecunia ne minus HS oo oo | consumito et ex pecunia publica in 
sing(ulos) | tvir(os) d(um) t(axat) Hs oo oo sumere consumere 
liceto, it||que els s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) facere liceto, dum ne quis ex 
ea | pecun(ia) sumat neve adtributionem faciat, | quam pecuniam 


[ 302 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


h(ac) l(ege) ad ea sacra, quae in collon(ia) aliove quo loco publice 
fient, dari | adtribui oportebit. || 

LXXI. Aediles quicumq(ue) erunt in suo mag(istratu) munus 
lu|dos scaenicos Iovi Iunoni Minervae tri|duom maiore parte diel, 
quot eius fieri pote|rit, et unum diem in circo aut in foro Veneri | 
faciunto, inque eis ludis eoque munere unus||quisque eorum de sua 
pecunia ne minus HS co oo | consumito deve publico in sing(ulos) 
aedil(es) HSoo | sumere liceto, eamq(ue) pecuniam mvir prae- 
f(ectusve) | dandam adtribuendam curanto itque lis | s(ine) f(raude) 
s(ua) c(apere) liceto. 

LX XII. Quotcumque pecuniae stipis nomine in aedis | sacras 
datum inlatum erit, quot elus pecunilae eis sacrés superfuerit, quae 
sacra, uti h(ac) l(ege) d(ata) | oportebit, ei deo deaeve, cuius ea aedes 
erit, fac|ta fuerint, ne quis facito neve curato neve intercel||dito, quo 
minus in ea aede consumatur, ad | quam aedem ea pecunia stipis 
nomine da|ta conlata erit, neve quis eam pecuniam alio | consumito 
neve quis facito, quo magis in | alia re consumatur. | 

LXXIII. Ne quis intra fines oppidi colon(iae)ve, qua aratro | 
circumductum erit, hominem mortuom | inferto neve ibi humato 
neve urito neve homi||nis mortul monimentum aedificato. Si quis | 
adversus ea fecerit, is c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) [ul(iae) 
HS 199 d(are) d(amnas) esto, | eiusque pecuniae gui volet petitio 
persecu|tio <exactioq(ue)> esto. Itque quot inaedificatum | erit 
irvir aedil(is)ve dimoliendum curanto. Si || adversus ea mortuus 
inlatus positusve erit, | expianto uti oportebit. | 

LXXIV. Ne quis ustrinam novam, ubi homo mortuus | com- 
bustus non erit, propius oppidum pas|sus p facito. Qui adversus 
ea fecerit, Hs 199 C(olonis) || c(oloniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) d(are) 
d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae gui volet peti|tio persecutiog(ue) 
ex h(ac) l(ege) esto. | 

LXXV. Ne quis in oppido colon(ia) Iul(ia) aedificium detegito | 
neve demolito neve disturbato, nisi si praedes | rvir(um) arbitratu 
dederit se redaedificaturum, aut || nisi decuriones decreverint, dum 
ne minus L ad|sint, cum e(a) r(es) consulatur. Si quis adversus ea 
fece(rit), | q(uanti) e(a) r(es) e(rit), t(antam) p(ecuniam) c(olonis) 
c(oloniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) dire) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusq(ue) 
pecuniae qui volet pe|titio persecutioq(ue) ex h(ac) l(ege) esto. | 


[ 303 ] 








20 


aS 


30 


35 


col. II 


[oO 


15 


20 


col. 


25 


30 


52 


40 
III 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


LXXVI. Figlinas teglarias maiores tegularum ccc tegu||larium- 
q(ue) in oppido colon(ia) Iul(ia) ne quis habeto. Qui | habuerit it 
aedificium isque locus publicus | col(oniae) Iuli(ae) esto, eiusq(ue) 
aedificii quicumque in c(olomia) | G(enetiva) Iul(ia) i(ure) d(icundo) 
p(raerit), s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) eam pecuniam in publicum redigito. | 

LXXVII. Si quis vias fossas cloacas r1vir aedil(is)ve publice || 
facere inmittere commutare aedificare mu|nire intra eos fines, qui 
colon(iae) Iul(iae) erunt, volet, | quot eius sine iniuria privatorum 
fiet, it is face|re liceto. | 

LXXIIX. Quae viae publicae itinerave publica sunt fuerunt || 
intra eos fines, qui colon(iae) dati erunt, quicumq(ue) | limites quae- 
que viae quaeque itinera per eos algros sunt erunt fueruntve, eae 
viae eique limites | eaque itinera publica sunto. | 

LXXIX. Qui fluvi rivi fontes lacus aquae stagna paludes || sunt 
in agro, qui colon(is) hwzusc(e) colon(iae) divisus | erit, ad eos rivos 
fontes lacus aquas<que> sta|gna paludes itus actus aquae haustus lis 
item | esto, qui eum agrum habebunt possidebunt, uti | 1is fuit, quieum 
agrum habuerunt possederunt. || Itemque lls, quieum agrum habent 
possident ha|bebunt possidebunt, itineris aquarum lex ius|que esto. | 

LXXX. Quot cuique negotii publice in colon(ia) de decu- 
r(ionum) sen|tentia datum erit, is cui negotium datum erit ellius 
rei rationem decurionib(us) reddito referto]que in dieb(us) cL 
proxumis guibus it negotium confecerit | quibusve it negotium gerere 
desierit, quot eius | fieri poterit s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). | 

LXXXI. Quicumque mvir(1) aed(iles)ve colon(iae) Lul(iae) 
erunt, ii scribis || suis, qui pecuniam publicam colonorumque | 
rationes scripturus erit, antequam tabulas | publicas scribet <trac- 
tetve> in contione palam | luci nundinis in forum ius iurandum 
adigi|to per lovem deosque Penates “‘sese pecuniam pu||blicam eius 
colon(iae) concustoditurum rationes|que veras habiturum esse, u(ti) 
q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olet) s(ine) d(olo) m(alo), ne|que 
se fraudem per litteras facturum esse sc(ientem) | d(olo) m(alo).” 
Uti quisque scriba ita iuraverit, in tabulas | publicas referatur facito. 
Qui ita non iuravellrit, is tabulas publicas ne scribito neve aes | 
apparitorium mercedemque ob e(am) r(em) kapito. | Qui ius iuran- 
dum non adegerit, ei Hs 199 mullta@ esto, elusq(ue) pecuniae gui 
volet petitio per|secutioq(ue) ex h(ac) l(ege) esto. || 


Lote {or bod 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


LXXXII. Qui agri quaeque silvae quaeq(ue) aedificia c(olonis) 
c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) | quibus publice utantur, data ad- 
tributa e|runt, ne quis eos agros neve eas silvas ven|dito neve locato 
longius quam in quinquen|nium, neve ad decuriones referto neve 
decul|rionum consultum facito, quo ei agri eaeve | silvae veneant 
aliterve locentur. Neve si ve|nierint, itcirco minus c(loniae) 
G(enetivae) Iul(iae) sunto. Quique iis | rebus fructus erit, quot 
se emisse dicat, is in | iuga sing(ula) inque annos sing(ulos) Hs c 
c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) d(are) d(amnas) || esto, 
elusque pecuniae qut volet petitio persecutiog(ue) ex h(ac) Lege) esto. 


(Deest tabulae pars dimidia) 


XCI. Si quts ex hac lege decurto augur pontifex coloniae G(enetivae) 
Tul(tae) factus creatusve | erit, tum quicumque decurio augur pon- 
tifex huiusque | col(oniae) domicilium in ea colonia) oppido pro- 
piusve it oppidum p(assus) oo | non habebit annis v proxumis, unde 
pignus elus quot satis | sit capi possit, is in ea col(onia) augur ponti- 
f(ex) decurio ne es||to quigue Irviri in ea col(onia) erunt, elus nomen 
de decurio|nibus sacerdotibusque de tabulis publicis eximendum | 
curanto, u(ti) q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olent), idq(ue) eos 
I1vir(os) s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) f(acere) I(iceto). | 

XCII. Ilviri quicumque in ea colon(ia) mag(istratum) habebunt, 
ei de legatio|nibus publice mittendis ad decuriones referunto, cum || 
m(aior) p(ars) decurion(um) eius colon(iae) aderit, quotque de his 
rebus | maior pars eorum qui tum aderunt constituerit, | it ius 
ratumque esto. Quamque legationem ex h(ac) l(ege) exve | d(e- 
curionum) d(ecreto), quot ex h(ac) l(ege) factum erit, obire opor- 
tuerit | neque obierit qui lectus erit, is pro se vicarium ex eo || 
ordine, uti hac lege de(curionum)ve decreto d(ari) o(portet), dato. 
Ni ita dederit, in | res sing(ulas) quotiens ita non fecerit, Hs ccIo9 
colon(is) huliusque colon(iae) d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque pe- 
cuniae qui volet petitio | persecutioque esto. | 

XCIII. Quicumque tvir post colon(iam) deductam factus 
creatusve || erit quive praef(ectus) ab r1vir(0) e lege huius coloniae 
relic|tus erit, is de loco publico neve pro loco publico neve | ab 
redemptore mancipe praed(e)ve donum munus mercedem | aliutve 
quid kapito neve accipito neve facito, quo | quid ex ea re at se 


AMA [ 305 ] 20 


30 


35 


40 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


col. 11 


Io 


15 


25 


30 


35 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


suorumve quem perveniat. Qui at||versus ea fecerit, Is HS CCIO9 
cc199 c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), 
eius|que pecuniae qui vo/et petitio persecutioque esto. | 

XCIIII. Ne quis in hac colon(ia) ius dicito neve culus in ea 
colon(ia) | iuris dictio esto nisi 11vir(i) aut quem i1vir praef(ectum) | 
reliquerit, aut aedil(is), uti h(ac) l(ege) o(portebit). Neve quis pro 
eo || imper(io) potestat(e)ve facito, quo quis in ea colonia | ius dicat, 
nisi quem ex h(ac) l(ege) dicere oportedzz. | 

XCV. Qui reciperatores dati erunt, si eo die quo iussi erunt | 
non iudicabunt, uvir praef(ectus)ve ubi e(a) r(es) a(gitur) eos rec(1- 
peratores) | eumque Culus res a(gitur) adesse iubeto diemque cer|tum 
dicito, quo die atsint, usque ateo, dum e(a) r(es) | iudicata erit, 
facitoque, uti e(a) r(es) in diebus xx | proxumis, quibus d(e) e(a) r(e) 
rec(iperatores) dati iussive e|runt iudicare, iudic(etur), u(ti) q(uod) 
r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olet). Testibusque || in eam rem publice 
dum taxat h(ominibus) xx, qui colon(i) | incolaeve erunt, quibus zs 
qui rem quaere|¢ volet, denuntietur facito. Quibusq(ue) ita tes|ti- 
monium denuntiatum erit quique in tes|timonio dicendo nominati 
erunt, Curato, || uti at it iudicium atsint. Testimoniumq(ue) | si 
quis quit earum rer(um), quae res tum age|tur, sciet aut audierit, 
luratus dicat faci|to, uti q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olet), dum 
ne omnino amplius | h(omines) xx in iudicia singula testimonium 
dice||re cogantur. Neve quem invitum testimo|nium dicere cogito, 
qui el, cuza r(es) tum age|tur, gener socer, vitricus privignus, pa- 
tron(us) | lib(ertus), consobrinus sit propiusve eum ea cogna|tione 
atfinitateve contingat. Si rvir || praef(ectus)ve qui ea re colon(is) 
petet, non-ade|rit ob eam rem, quot ei morbus sonticus, | vadimonium, 
iudicium, sacrificium, funus | familiare feriaeve demicales erunt, 
quo | minus adesse possit sive is propter magistra||tus potestatemve 
p(opuli) Romani) minus atesse poterit: | quo magis eo absente de 
eo Cul 7s negotium | facesset recip(eratores) sortiantur reiciantur 
res iu|dicetur, ex h(ac) I(ege) n(ihilum) r(ogatur). Si privatus petet 
et 1s, cum | de ea re iudicium fieri oportebit, non aderit || neque 
arbitratu tvir(i) praef(ecti)ve ubi e(a) r(es) a(getur) exculsabitur ez 
harum quam causam esse, quo minus | atesse possit, morbum sonti- 
cum, vadimonium, | iudicium, sacrificium, funus familiare, ferias | 
deicales eumve propter mag(istratus) potestatemve || p(opuli) 


[ 306 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


R(omani) atesse non posse: post ei earum rerum, quarum | h(ac) 
l(ege) quaestio erit, actio ne esto. Deq(ue) e(a) r(e) siremps | lex 
resque esto, quasz si neque iudices delecti neq(ue) recip(eratores) | 
in eam rem dati essent. | 

XCVI. Si quis decurio eius colon(iae) ab r1vir(o) praef(ecto)ve 
postulabit | u¢i ad decuriones referatur, de pecunia publica de||que 
multis poenisque deque locis agris aedificis | publicis quo facto 
quaeri iudicarive oporteat: tum | 11vir quzve iure dicundo praerit d(e) 
e(a) r(e) primo | quoque die decuriones consulito decurionum|que 
consultum facito fiat, cum non minus m(aior) p(ars) || decurionum 
atsit, cum ea res consuletur. Vti m(aior) p(ars) | decurionum, qui 
tum aderint, censuer(int), ita ius | ratumque esto. | 

XCVII. Ne quis vir neve quis pro potestate in ea colon(ia) | 
facito neve ad decuriones referto neve d(ecurionum) d(ecretum) 
facito || fiat, quo quis colon(is) colon(iae) patron(us) sit atoptetur|ve 
praeter eum, cuz c(olonis) a(grorum) d(andorum) a(tsignandorum) 
i(us) ex lege Iulia est, eum|que, qui eam colon(iam) deduxerit, liberos 
posterosgue | eorum, nisi de m(aioris) p(artis) decurion(um) gui tum 
aderunt per tabellam | sententia, cum non minus & aderunt, cum 
e(a) r(es) || consuletur. Qui atversus ea fecerit, Hs 199 colon(is) | 
eius colon(iae) d(are) d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae colon(is) etus | 
colon(iae) gui volet petitio esto. | 

XCVIII. Quamcumque munitionem decuriones huius|ce co- 
loniae decreverint, si m(aior) p(ars) decurionum || atfuerit, cum e(a) 
r(es) consuletur, eam munitionem | fieri liceto, dum ne amplius in 
annos sing(ulos) in|que homines singulos puberes operas quinas et | 
in <iumenta plaustraria> iuga sing(ula) operas ter|nas decernant. 
Eique munitioni aed(iles) qui tum || erunt ex d(ecurionum) d(ecreto) 
praesunto. Vti decuriones censu|erint, ita muniendum curanto, dum 
ne in|vito eius opera exigatur, qui minor annor(um) xur | aut 
maior annor(um) Lx natus erit. Qui in ea colon(ia) | intrave eius 
colon(iae) finis domicilium praedi||umve habebit neque eius colon(iae) 
colon(us) erit, is ei}dem munitioni uti colon(us) pareto. | 

XCVIIII. Quae aquae publicae in oppido colon(iae) Gen- 
(etivae) | adducentur, mvir, qui tum erunt, ad decuriones, | cum 
duae partes aderunt, referto, per quos agros | aquam ducere liceat. 
Qua pars maior decurion(um), | qui tum aderunt, duci decreverint, 


Rie ieyedh ai 9 20-2 


col. 11 


wr 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


col. Iv 


Io 


5 


20 


25 


30 


35 


col. v 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


dum ne || per it aedificium, quot non eius rei causa factum | sit, 
aqua ducatur, per eos agros aquam ducere | i(us) p(otestas)que esto, 
neve quis facito, quo minus ita | aqua ducatur. | 

C. Si quis colon(us) aquam in privatum caducam ducere || volet 
isque at uvir(um) adierit postulabit|gue, uti ad decurion(es) referat, 
tum is I1vir, a quo | ita postulatum erit, ad decuriones, cum non 
mi{nus xxxx aderunt, referto. Si decuriones m(aior) p(ars) qui | 
tum atfuerint, aquam caducam in privatum duci || censuerint, ita 
ea aqua utatur, quotsine priva|tz iniuria fiat, i(us) potest(as)que e(sto). | 

CI. Quicumque comitia magistratzbus creandis subrogan|dis 
habebit, is ne quem eis comitis pro tribu acci|pito neve renuntiato 
neve renuntiari lubeto, || qui zz earum qua causa erit, e qua eum 
h(ac) I(ege) in colon(ia) | decurionem nominari creari inve decu- 
rionibus | esse non oporteat non liceat. | 

CII. Ilvir qui h(ac) l(ege) quaeret iud(icium)ve exercebit, quod 
iudicium | uti uno die fiat h(ac) l(ege) prestitutum non est, ne quis || 
eorum ante h(oram) 7 neve post horam xr diei quaerito | neve 
iudicium exerceto. Isque rvir in singul(os) | accusatores, qui eorum 
delator erit, ei h(oras) 1111, qui | subscriptor erit, h(oras) 11 accusandi 
potest(atem) facito. Si | quis accusator de suo tempore alteri con- 
cesserit, || quot eius Cuique concessum erit, eo amplius cui | con- 
cessum erit dicendi potest(atem) facito. Qui de suo | tempore alteri 
concesserit, quot elus cuique conces|serit, eo minus ei dicendi 
potest(atem) facito. Quot horas | omnino omnib(us) accusatorib(us) 
in sing(ulas) actiones di||cendi potest(atem) fieri oporteb(it), totidem 
horas et alter|um tantum reo quive pro eo dicet in sing(ulas) 
actiones | dicendi potest(atem) facito. | 

CIITI. Quicumque in col(onia) Genet(iva) rrvir praef(ectus)ve 
i(ure) d(icundo) praerit, eum colon(os) | incolasque contributosgue 
quocumque tempore colon(iae) fin(ium) | defendendorum causa 
armatos educere decurion(es) censuerint, || quot m(aior) p(ars) qui 
tum aderunt decreverint, id e(i) s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) f(acere) I(iceto). 
Fi|que tvir(o) aut quem ivir armatis praefecerit idem | ius eadem- 
que animadversio esto, uti tr(ibuno) mil(itum) p(opuli) R(omani) 
in | exercitu p(opuli) R(omani) est, itque e(i) s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) 
f(acere) I(iceto) i(us) p(otestas)que e(sto), dum it, quot | m(aior) 
p(ars) decurionum decreverit, qui tum aderunt, fat. || 


[ 308 ] 





FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


CIIII. Qui limites decumanique intra fines c(oloniae) G(ene- 
tivae) deducti facti|que erunt, quaecum(que) fossae limitales in eo 
agro erunt, | qui iussu C. Caesaris dict(atoris) imp(eratoris) et lege 
Antonia senat(us)que | c(onsultis) pl(ebi)que sc(itis) ager datus at- 
signatus erit, ne quis limites | decumanosque opsaeptos neve quit 
immolitum neve || quit ibi opsaeptum habeto, neve eos arato, neve 
eis fossas | opturato neve opsaepito, quo minus suo itinere aqua | ire 
fluere possit. Si quis atversus ea quit fecerit, is in | res sing(ulas), 
quotienscumq(ue) fecerit, Hs oo c(olonis) c(oloniae) G/(enetivae) 
I(uliae) d(are) d(amnas) esto, | eiusq(ue) pecun(iae) gui volet 
petitio p(ersecutio)q(ue) esto. || 

CV. Si quis quem decurion(um) indignum loci aut ordinis 
de|curionatus esse dicet, praeterquam quot libertinus | erit, et ab 
Ivir(o) postulabitur, uti de ea re iudicijum reddatur, rvir, quo de 
ea re in ius aditum erit, | ius dicito tudiciaque reddito. Isque 
decurio, || qui iudicio condemnatus erit, postea decurio | ne esto 
neve in decurionibus sententiam dici|to neve 11vir(atum) neve aedili- 
tatem petito neve | quis 11vir comitis suffragio eius rationem | 
habeto neve t1vir(um) neve aedilem renuntiljato neve renuntiari 
sinito. 

CVI. Quicumque c(olonus) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) erit, quae 
iussu C. Caesaris dict(atoris) ded(ucta) | est, ne quem in ea col(onia) 
coetum conventum coniurationem... 


(Deest tabula continens capita leg. CVI fin. 
CVH-CXXIU, CXXIII princ.) 


CXXIII. IIvir ad quem d(e) e(a) r(e) in tus aditum erit, ubi 
tudicibus, apud quos e(a) r(es) agetur, matort parti eorum planum 
factum non erit, eum de quo iudicitum datum est decurionis loco indignum 
esse, eum | qui accusabitur ab his iudicibus eo iudicio absolvi | iubeto. 
Qui ita absolutus erit, quod iudicium praevari|cation(is) causa 
factum non sit, is eo iudicio h(ac) l(ege) absolutus esto. | 

CXXIIII. Si quis decurio c(oloniae) G(enetivae) decurionem 
c(oloniae) G(enetivae) h(ac) l(ege) de indignitate ac||cusabit, eumgue 
quem accusabit eo iudicio h(ac) l(ege) condemna|rit, is <qui quem 
eo iudicio ex h(ac) I(ege) condemnarit,> si volet, | in eius locum 
qui condemnatus erit sententiam dice|re, ex h(ac) l(ege) liceto itque 


[ 309 ] 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


Tab. Iv, 
col. 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


eum (sine) f(raude) s(ua) iure lege recteq(ue) falcere liceto, eiusque 
is locus in decurionibus sen||tentiae dicendae rogandae h(ac) I(ege) 
esto. | 

CXXV. Quicumque locus ludis decurionibus datus a¢signatus | 
relictusve erit, ex quo loco decuriones ludos spectare | o(portebit), 
ne quis in eo loco nisi qui tum decurio c(oloniae) G(enetivae) erit, 
quilve tum magistratus Imperium potestatemve colonor(wm) || 
suffragio <geret> iussuque C. Caesaris dict(atoris) co(n)s(ulis) prove | 
co(n)s(ule) habebit, quive pro quo imperio potestateve tum | in 
c(olonia) Gen(etiva) erit, quibusque loces in decurionum loco | ex 
d(ecreto) d(ecurionum) col(oniae) Gen(etivae) d(ari) o(portebit), 
quod decuriones decr(everint), cum non minus | dimidia pars de- 
curionum adfuerit cum e(a) r(es) consulta erit, || <ne quis praeter 
eos, qui (supra) s(cripti) s(unt), qui locus decurionibus da|tus at- 
signatus relictusve erit, in eo loco> sedeto neve | quis alium in ea 
loca sessum ducito neve sessum duci | iubeto sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). 
Si quis adversus ea sederit s(ciens) d(olo) m(alo) szve | quis atversus 
ea sessum duxerit ducive iusserit s(ciens) d(olo) m(alo), || is in res 
sing(ulas), quotienscumque quit d(e) e(a) r(e) atversus ea | fecerit, 
HS 199 C(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(are) d(amnas) 
esto, elusque pecuniae gui eorum | volet rec(iperatorio) iudicio aput 
IIvir(um) praef(ectum)ve actio petitio perse|cutio ex h(ac) /(ege) 
<i(us) potest(as)que> e(sto). | 

CXXVI. IIvir, aed(ilis), praef(ectus) quicumque c(oloniae) 
G(enetivae) I(uliae) ludos scaenicos faciet, si||ve quis alius c(oloniae) 
G(enetivae) I(uliae) ludos scaenicos faciet, colonos Geneti|vos 
incolasque hospitesgue atventoresque ita sessum du|cito, <ita locum 
dato distribuito atsignato,> uti d(e) e(a) r(e) <de | eo loco dando 
atsignando> decuriones, cum non min(us) | L <decuriones>, cum 
e(a) r(es) c(onsuletur), in decurionibus adfuerint, || decreverint 
statuerint s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). Quot ita ab decurionib(us) | <de 
loco dando atsignando) statutum decretum erit, | it h(ac) l(ege) i(us) 
r(atum)q(ue) esto. Neve is qui ludos faciet aliter aliove | modo 
sessum ducito neve duci iubeto neve locum dato | neve dari iubeto 
neve locum attribuito neve attribui || iubeto neve locum atsignato 
neve atsignari iubeto ne|ve quit facito, que aliter aliove modo, adque 
uti | locus datus atsignatus attributusve erit, sedeant, ne|ve facito, 


[ 310 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


quo quis alieno loco sedeat, sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). Qui atver|sus 
ea fecerit, is in res singulas, quotienscumque quit || atversus ea 
fecerit, Hs199 c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(are) 
d(amnas) e(sto), eiusgwe pecunilae cui volet rec(iperatorio) iudicio 
aput lvir(um) praef(ectum)ve actio pe|titio persecutioque h(ac) 
l(ege) <ius potestasque> esto. | 

CXXVII. Quicumque ludi scaenici c(oloniae) G(enetivae) 
I(uliae) fient, ne quis in or] chestram ludorum spectandor(um) causa 
praeter ma(gistratum) | prove mag(istratu) p(opuli) R(omani), quive 
i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) et si quis senator p(opuli) R(omani) est 
erit | fuerit, et si quis senatoris f(ilius) p(opuli) R(omani) est erit 
fuerit, et si | quis praef(ectus) fabrum eius mag(istratus) prove 
magistratz, || qui provinc(iarum) Hispaniar(um) ulteriorem <Bae- 
ticae pralerit> optinebit, erzt, et quos ex h(ac) I(ege) decurion(um) 
loco | <decurionem) sedere oportet oportebit, <praeter eos | qui supra 
s(cripti) s(unt) ne quis in orchestram ludorum spectan|dorum causa> 
sedeto, <neve quisque mag(istratus) prove mag(istratu) || p(opull) 
R(omani) q(ui) i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) ducito>, neve quem quis 
sessum ducito, | neve in eo loco sedere sinito, uti q(uod) r(ecte) 
f(actum) e(sse) u(olet) s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). | 

CXXVIII. II (vir) aed(ilis) praef(ectus) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) 
I(uliae) quicumque erit, is suo quoque anno mag(istratu) | im- 
perioq(ue) facito curato, quod elus fier! poterit, | u(ti) q(uod) r(ecte) 
f(actum) e(sse) v(olet) s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) mag(istri) ad fana templa 
delubra, quem || ad modum decuriones censuerin(¢) <suo quo|que 
anno> fiant ezqu(e) <d(ecurionum) d(ecreto)> suo quoque anno | 
ludos circenses, sacrzficia pulvinariaque | facienda curent, quem 
ad modum <quitquit> de tis | rebus, mag(istris) creandis, /w(dis) 
circensibus facien||dis, sacrificiis procurandis, pulvinaribus fa|ciendis 
decuriones statuerint decreverint, | <ea omnia ita fiant>. Deque 
iis omnibus rebus | quae s(upra) s(criptae) s(unt) quotcumque de- 
curiones statuerint | decreverint, it lus ratumque esto, eiq(ue) 
omnes, || at quos ea res pertinebit, quot quemque eorum | ex h(ac) 
l(ege) facere oportebit, faciunto s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). Si quis | at- 
versus ea fecerit quotienscumque quit atver|sus ea fecerit, HS CCI99 
c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(@are) d(amnas) e(sto), eius- 
que pecun(iae) | gui eorum volet rec(iperatorio) iudic(io) aput 


[ 311 ] 


45 


col. II 


Lal 


oO 


- 


5 


30 


35 


40 


4 


Sr 


50 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


I1vir(um) || praef(ectum)ve actio petitio persecutioq(ue) e(x) h(ac) 
l(ege) | <ius pot(estas)> esto. | 

CXXIX. IIvir(i) aediles praef(ectus) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) 
I(uliae) quicumgq(w)e erunt decurionesq(ue) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) 
I(uliae) qui|cumquwe erunt, ii omnes d(ecurionum) d(ecretis) dili- 
genter parento optemperanto s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) fa|ciuntoque uti 
quot guemq(ue) eor(um) decurionum.d(ecreto) agere facere o(porte- 
bit) ea om||nia agant faciant, u(ti) q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) 
v(olent) s(ine) d(olo) m/(alo). Si quis ita non fecerit sive quit at- 
ver|sus ea fecerit sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo), is in res sing(ulas) Hs CcI99 
c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), 
eiusque pecuniae gui | eor(um) volet rec(iperatorio) iudic(io) aput 
I1vir(um) praef(ectum)ve actio petitio persecutioque ex h(ac) l(ege) | 
<ius potestasque) e(sto). | 

CXXX. Ne quis rvir aed(ilis) praef(ectus) c(oloniae) G(ene- 
tivae) I(uliae) quicunque erit ad decurion(es) c(oloniae) G(ene- 
tivae) referto neve decurion(es) || consulito neve d(ecretum) 
d(ecurionum) facito neve d(e) e(a) r(e) in tabulas p(ublicas) referto 
neve referri iubeto | neve quis decur(io) d(e) e(a) r(e), q(ua) d(e) 
r(e) a(getur), in decurionib(us) sententiam dicito neve d(ecretum) 
d(ecurionum) scri|bito, neve in tabulas pudlicas referto, neve refe- 
rundum curato, quo quis | senator senatorisve f(ilius) p(opuli) 
R(omani) c(oloniae) .G(enetivae) patronus atoptetur sumatur fiat 
nisi de trilum partium d(ecurionum) <d(ecreto)> senten¢(éa) per 
tabellam <facito> et nisi de eo homine, <de quo || tum referetur con- 
suletur, d(ecretum) d(ecurionum) fiat), qui, cum | e(a) r(es) a(getur), 
in Italiam sine imperio privatus | erit. Si quis adversus ea ad decu- 
rion(es) rettulerit d(ecurionum)ve d(ecretum) fecerit faciendumve | 
curaverit inve tabulas pud/icas rettulerit referrive iusserit sive quis 
in decurionib(us) | sententiam dixerit d(ecurionum)ve d(ecretum) 
scripserit inve tabulas publicas rettulerit referendumve || curaverit, 
in res sing(ulas), quofzenscumque quit atversus ea fecerit, 7s Hs CCCIO90 
c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) | d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), 
elusque pecuniae gui eorum volet rec(iperatorio) iudi(cio) aput 
IIvir(um) interregem praef(ectum) actio | petitio persecutioque ex 
h(ac) lege) <z(us) potest(as)que> e(sto). | 

CXXXI. Ne quis rvir <aed(ilis)> praef(ectus) c(oloniae) G(ene- 


[eS teae 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


tivae) I(uliae) guicumque erit ad decuriones c(oloniae) G(enetivae) 
referto neve d(ecuriones) con|sulito neve d(ecretum) d(ecurionum) ol. 11 
facito neve d(e) e(a) r(e) in tabulas publicas referto neve referri 
iubeto | neve quis decurio d(e) e(a) r(e) in decurionib(us) sententiam 
dicito neve d(ecretum) d(ecurionum) scribito ne|ve in tabulas 
publicas referto neve referundum curato, quo quis senator | sena- 
torisve f(ilius) p(opuli) Romani) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) 
hospes atoptetur, hospitium tesserave hospita/s cum || quo fiat, isi 5 
de maioris p(artis) decurionum sententia per tabellam <facito> et 
nisi | de eo homine, <de quo tum referetur consuletur, d(ecretum) 
d(ecurionum) fiat>, qui, cum e(a) r(es) a(getur), in Italiam | sine 
imperio privatus erit. Si quis adversus ea ad decuriones rettulerit 
d(ecretum)ve | d(ecurionum) fecerit faciendumve curaverit inve 
tabulas publicas rettulerit re|ferrive iusserit sive quis in decurionibus 
sententiam dixerit d(ecretum)ve d(ecurionum) || scripserit Inve ro 
tabul(as) public(as) rettulerit referendumve curaverit, | zs in res 
sing(ulas) quotienscumque quit adversus ea fecerit, HS ccr99 c(olonis) 
c(oloniae) | G/(enetivae) Iuliae d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque 
pecuniae gui eorum volet recu(peratorio) iudic(io) | aput 11vir(um) 
praef(ectum)ve actio petitio persecutioque h(ac) l(ege) <ius potest(as)- 
que> esto. | 

CXXXII. Ne quis in c(olonia) G(enetiva) post h(anc) l(egem) 
datam petitor kandidatus, || quicumque in c(olonia) G(enetiva) 15 
I(ulia) mag(istratum) petet, magistratusve peten|di causa in eo 
anno, quo quisque anno petitor | kandidatus mag (istratum) petet 
petiturusve erit, <mag(istratus) pe|tendi> convivia facito neve at 
cenam quem | vocato neve conyivium habeto neve facito s(ciens) 
d(ole) m(alo), || quo quis suae petitionis causa convivium habeat | 20 
ad cenamve quem vocet, praeter <dum)> quod ip|se kandidatus 
petitor in eo anno, guo mag(istratum) petat, | vocarzt dum taxat 
im dies sing(ulos) h(ominum) vir <convivzum | habeto>, si volet, 
s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). Neve quis petitor kandidatus || donum munus 25 
aliudve quit det largiatur peti|tionis causa sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). 
Neve quis alterius petitionis | causa convivia facito neve quem ad 
cenam yoca|to neve convivium habeto, neve quis alterius pe|titionis 
Causa cui quit dozum munus aliutve quzt || dato donato largito 30 
sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). Si quis atversus ea | fecerit, Hs 199 c(olonis) 


E 3k zes) 


She 


40 


45 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(@are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque pe- 
cuniae gui eor(um) volet | rec(iperatorio) iudic(io) aput Iivir(um) 
praef(ectum)ve actio petitio per|sec(utio)que ex h(ac) lege) <i(us) 
potest(as)que> esto. | 

CX XXIII. Qui col(oni) Gen(etivi) Iul(ienses) h(ac) I(ege) sunt 
erunt, eorum omnium uxollres, quae in c(olonia) G(enetiva) I(ulia) 
h(ac) lege) sunt, <eae mulieresy legibus c(oloniae) G(enetivae) 
I(uliae) vijrique parento iuraque <ex h(ac) l(ege)>, quaecumque | 
in hac lege scripta sunt, omnium rerum ex h(ac) l(ege) haben|to 
s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). | 

CXXXIV. Ne quis vir <aedil(is)> praefectus c(oloniae) G(ene- 
tivae), quicumque erit, post || h(anc) I(egem) ad decuriones c(oloniae) 
G(enetivae) referto neve decuriones consu|lito neve d(ecretum) 
d(ecurionum) facito neve d(e) e(a) r(e) in tabulas publicas re|ferto 
neve referri iubeto neve quis decurio, cum e(a) | r(es) a(getur), in 
decurionibus sententiam dicito neve d(ecretum) d(ecurionum) | 
scribito neve in tabulas publicas referto neve || referendum curato, 
quo cul pecunia publica a/zutve | quid honoris habendi causa mune- 
risve dandi polllicendi prove statua danda ponenda detur donetur.... 

Four bronze tablets found in 1870 and 1874 on the site of Urso 
in Baetica, now in,the museum at Madrid. Each tablet had ori- 
ginally five columns of text, as the third tablet, preserved in its 
entirety, shows. From each of the other three extant tablets two 
columns are missing. The tablets containing the early part of the 
law, perhaps four in number, and the eighth tablet, have not been 
found. Numbers added at a later date on the margins of the tablets 
indicate the division into chapters. Probably these tablets were 
not engraved until after Caesar’s death, cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 
1, 208 ff.; Hiibner, Ex. scr. ep. 805. Dessau places the date of 
the engraving in the reign of Domitian. The letters on the fourth 
tablet are smaller than those on the others and in it there are many 
redundant words and phrases which we have enclosed in obtuse- 
angled brackets. Some scholars think that this tablet takes the 
place of one that had been lost. Gradenwitz (Sitz. Ber. d. Heidel- 
berger Akad. 1920, Heft 17) explains the unevenness in form and 
manner found in this law as well as in the charters of Malaca and 
Salpensa on the theory that we have an Urtext and a Beischrift. 


[ 314 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


For a summary of the chapters, cf. Mommsen, op. cit. 1, 211 ff, 
247 ff. For a translation into English, cf. Hardy, Three Spanish 
Charters, 23 ff. 

The law in its original form must have been drafted by Julius 
Caesar. In chap. 125 reference is made to any local magistrate 
holding office zussu C. Caesaris dictatoris consulis prove consule 
(cf. chap. 66), and similarly in chap. 106 we read quae (i.e. colonia) 
tussu C. Caesaris dictatoris deducta est. Caesar is nowhere called 
divus, so that the measure antedates the autumn of 43 B.c. (cf. 
Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 756, n. 1). It probably belongs to the early 
part of the year 44 B.c. (cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 207), and may 
have been one of the bills which Antony found, or maintained that 
he found, among the papers of Caesar (cf. Cic. Phil. 5. 4. 10). The 
founding of the colony was authorized iussu C. Caesaris dictatoris 
imperatoris et lege Antonia senatusque consultis plebique scitis (chap. 
104). This measure is then a /ex data authorized by a S.C. and 
plebiscite, proposed by Antony. 

The greater part of the document deals with strictly domestic 
matters, but certain chapters have to do with the relations which 
the municipality bore to the central government, or to Roman 
citizens, and only with those are we concerned here. The /egationes 
referred to in chap. 92 would include embassies sent to Rome, to 
the provincial governor, or to the provincial council (cf. p. 150, 
n, 7 and no. 126). ‘They sometimes played an important part in 
calling the grievances of a city or a province to the attention of the 
central government, but such missions were often useless and were 
expensive, and ultimately Vespasian limited the number of members 
to three (Dig. 50. 7. 5). In Urso, since the acceptance of an appoint- 
ment was compulsory, probably /egatz met their own expenses. 

For the part which patron took in composing local difficulties 
and in representing a municipality in Rome, cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 
3, 1202 ff. and the documents in this book dealing with public 
arbitration. Chapp. 97 and 130 prescribe rules for the election of 
patroni at Urso. The man who led the colonists out and the man 
who assigned land to them, together with their descendants, are 
made patrons ex officio. Other patrons must be chosen in the senate 
when at least fifty members are present (cf. chap. 97). Mommsen 


Bete d 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


believed (Ges. Schr. 1, 34.4. ff.) that the approval of the local popular 
assembly was also necessary for the choice of a patron, but ¢f. 
Hardy, op. cit. 108, n. 29. Chap. 130 requires the approval of 
seventy-five of the one hundred decurions, voting with secret 
ballots, for the election of a Roman senator or his son (cf. no. 64), 
and absolutely prohibits the election of such a person unless he Is 
a private citizen in Italy se imperio. All the governors of the 
provinces were at this time senators, and Rome wished to prevent 
municipalities from currying favour with the governor of their 
province by electing him to a position of honor. The same objection 
would attach in a less degree to the election of any senator, because 
he might at any time be put in charge of a province. The Album 
of Canusium of A.D. 223 (no. 136) has a list of thirty-nine patronz, 
of whom thirty-one are Roman senators and eight are knights. 
Mommsen finds (Ges. Schr. 1, 239) only three cases of patrons 
who were senators with the zmperium. Perhaps they were elected 
after the termination of their zmperzum (cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 
Isr 8O50n. 1). 

Patronatus and hospitium are often confused in the inscriptions 
(cf. Wilmanns, nos. 2850, 2852), but for the distinction between 
them, cf. Leonhard, R.E. 8, 2496. The fact that a senate could 
elect an hospes when only a majority of the decurions was present 
(chap. 131) shows that the position was held in less esteem than 
that of patronus. ‘The same discrimination is made against Roman 
senators and their sons in this case as holds in the case of the patron. 

Of the privileges granted to Roman officials and Roman senators 
the most noteworthy is the assignment to them of seats in the 
orchestra of the theatre (chap. 127). 

The provision in chap. 103 which authorized the duovir, on 
receiving the approval of a majority of the decurions present at a 
meeting, “‘to call to arms colonists, resident aliens, and attributed 
persons”’ for the defense of the colony is surprising and without 
parallel in other charters, unless we accept Bormann’s bold con- 
jecture (‘Fahreshefte d. dst. archdol. Inst. 9 (1906), 315 ff.) for the 
Fragm. legis Lauriscensis (Bruns, 33a) and read uter (i.e. ex Uviris) 
postea municipes incolasque....causa armatos educet. There is no 
intimation even that the municipal senate required the authorization 


[ 316 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


of the provincial governor in taking this step. Very likely this was 
a sovereign power granted to municipalities on the frontier or in 
unruly districts. Reference is made to the members of these armed 
forces in various inscriptions (cf. hastifert cevitatis Mattiacorum, 
CIL. xin, 7317). They could be quickly summoned to repress 
an uprising and to hold an attacking enemy in check until the 
legions could arrive (cf. Cagnat, De munictpalibus et provinctalibus 
militiis in imperio Romano, 93), and perhaps the provincial militia 
(Hirschfeld, 392 ff.) was made up of these municipal levies (cf 
Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 6, 154). It was in harmony with Roman 
practices in Italy to put this levy in charge of the local magistrate 


(cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 675, n. 3). 


27. LEX DE GALLIA CISALPINA, VULGO LEX RUBRIA 
DE GALLIA CISALPINA 
(49-42 a. Chr.) 


CIL, 15/205 = x1, 1146; Bruns, 16; Girard, p;. 92; Ricco- 
bono, p. 135. 

. . .lussum iudicatumve erit, id ratum ne esto; quodque quis|que 
quomq(ue) d. e. r. decernet interdeicetve seive sponsionem | fierei 
iudicaretve iubebit iudiciumve quod d. e. r. dabit, is | in id decretum 
interdictum sponsionem iudicium exceptio||nem addito addive 
iubeto: “O.d.r. operis novi nuntiationem | mvir, m1vir prae- 
fectusve eius municipei non remeisserit.”’ | 

XX. Qua de re quisque, et a quo, in Gallia Cisalpeina damnei 
infectei | ex formula restipularei satisve accipere volet, et ab eo 
quei | ibei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit) postulaverit, idque non k(alum- 
niae) k(aussa) se facere iuraverit: tum is, quo || d. e. r. in ius aditum 
erit, eum, quei in ius eductus erit, d. e. r. ex formu|la repromittere 
et, sei satis darei debebit, satis dare iubeto de|cernito. Quei eorum 
ita non repromeisserit aut non satis dede|rit, sei quid interim damni 
datum factumve ex ea re aut ob e(am) r(em) eo|ve nomine erit, 
quam ob rem, utei damnei infectei repromissio || satisve datio fierei 
tubeatur, postulatum erit: tum mag(istratus) prove mag(istratu) 
I1vir | 11Ivir praefec(tus)ve, quoquomque d. e. r. in ius aditum erit, 
d. e. r. ita ius | deicito iudicia dato iudicareque iubeto cogito, proinde 


[eB Lzun) 


Tab. 1 


Io 


20 


25 


30 


Bo 


40 


45 


50 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


atque sei | d.e. r., quom ita postulatum esset, damnei infectei ex 
formula | recte repromissum satisve datum esset. D. e. r. quod ita 
iudicium || datum iudicareve iussum iudicatumve erit, ius ratumque 
esto, | dum in ea verba, sei damnei infectei repromissum non erit, 
iudi|cium det itaque iudicare iubeat: “I(udex) e(sto). S(ei), ante- 
quam id iudicium | q. d. r. a(gitur) factum est, Q. Licinius damni 
infectei eo nomine q.d.| r. a(gitur) eam stipulationem, quam is 
quei Romae inter peregrei||nos ius deicet in albo propositam habet, 
L. Seio repromeississet: | tum quicquid eum Q. Licinium ex ea 
stipulatione L. Seio d(are) f(acere) opor|teret ex f(ide) b(ona) d(um)- 
¢(axat) HS e(ius) i(udex) QO. Licinium L. Seio, sei ex decreto r1vir(el) | 
Illivir(ei) praefec(tei)ve Mutinensis, quod elus zs I1vir IIvir prae- 
fec(tus)|ve ex lege Rubria, seive id pl(ebei)ve sc(itum) est, decre- 
verit, Q. Licinius eo || nomine qua d. r. a(gitur) L. Seio damnei 


infectel repromittere no|luit, c(ondemnato); s(ei) n(on) p(aret), 


a(bsolvito)”’; aut sei damnei infectei satis datum non erit, | in ea verba 
iudicium det: “‘I(udex) e(sto). S(ei), antequam id iudicium gq. d. r. 
a(gitur) | factum est, Q. Licinius damnei infectei eo nomine q. d. r. 
a(gitur) ea | stipulatione, quam is quei Romae inter peregrinos ius 
deicet || in albo propositam habet, L. Seio satis dedisset: tum q(uic)- 
q(uid) eum | Q. Licinium ex ea stipulatione L. Seio d(are) f(acere) 
oporteret ex f(ide) b(ona) d(um) t(axat), | e(ius) i(udex) QO. Licinium 
L. Seio, sei ex decreto i1vir(el) 111Ivir(el) praef(ectei)ve Muti|nensis, 
quod eius is Ivir m1Ivir praefect(us)ve ex lege Rubria, sei|ve id 
pl(ebei)ve sc(itum) est, decreverit, QO. Licinius eo nomine q. d. r. 
a(gitur) || L. Seio damnei infectei satis dare noluit, c(ondemnato); 
s(ei) n(on) p(aret), a(bsolvito)”’; dum ivir | murvir i(ure) d(eicundo) 
praefec(tus)ve d.e.r. ius ita deicat curetve, utei ea no|mina et 
municipium colonia locus in eo iudicio, quod ex ieis | quae proxsume 
s(cripta) s(unt) accipietur, includantur concipiantur, | quae includei 
concipei s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) oporteret debebitve, ne quid || ei quei 
d.e. r. aget petetve captionei ob e(am) r(em) aut eo nomine esse | 
possit: neive ea nomina, quae in earum qua formula quae s(upra) | 
s(cripta) s(unt), aut Mutinam in eo iudicio includei concipei curet, 
nisez, | iel, quos inter id iudicium accipietur leisve contestabitur, | 
ieis nominibus fuerint, quae in earum qua formula s(upra) s(cripta) 
s(unt), || et nisei sei Mutinae ea res agetur; neive quis mag(istratus) 


Woe peer al 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


prove mag(istratu), | neive quis pro quo imperio potestateve erit, 
intercedito nei|ve quid aliud facito, quo minus de ea re ita iudictum 
detur | iudiceturque. | 

XXI. A quoquomq(ue) pecunia certa credita, signata forma 
p(ublica) p(opulei) R(omanei), in eorum quo o. m.c. p. | f. v. c. ¢. 
t. ve, quae sunt eruntve in Gallia Cisalpeina, petetur, quae res non | 
pluris Hs xv erit, sei is eam pecuniam in iure apud eum, quel ibei 
i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), ei quei || eam petet, aut ei quoius nomine 
ab eo petetur, d(are) o(portere) debereve se confessus | erit, neque 
id quod confessus erit solvet satisve faciet, aut se sponsione | iudicio- 
que utez oportebit non defendet, seive is ibei d. e. r. in lure non | 
responderit, neque d.e.r. sponsionem faciet neque iudicio utei 
oportebit | se defendet: tum de eo, a quo ea pecunia peteita erit, 
deque eo, quoi eam || pecuniam d(arei) o(portebit), s(iremps) res 
lex lus caussaque o(mnibus) o(mnium) r(erum) esto atque utel 
esset esseve | oporteret, sei is, quei ita confessus erit, aut d.e. r. 
non responderit aut se | sponsione iudicioque utei oportebit non 
defenderit, eius pecuniae iei | quel eam suo nomine petierit quoive 
eam d(arei) o(portebit), ex iudicieis dateis iudi|careve recte iusseis 
iure lege damnatus esset fuisset. Queique quomque || vir r1Vvir 
praefec(tus)ve zbei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), is eum, quei ita quid 
confessus erit | neque id solvet satisve faciet, eumve quei se sponsione 
iudiciove utei | oportebit non defenderit aut in iure non responderit 
neque id solvet | satisve faciet, t(antae) p(ecuniae), quanta ea pecunia 
erit de qua tum inter eos am|bigetur, dum t(axat) ws xv s(ine) 
f(raude) s(ua) duci iubeto; queique eorum quem, ad quem || ea res 
pertinebit, duxserit, id ei fraudi poenaeve ne esto: quodque ita 
fac|tum actum iussum erit, id ius ratumque esto. Quo minus in 
eum, quei ita | vadimonium Romam ex decreto eius, quei ibei i(ure) 
d(eicundo) p(raerit), non promeisserit | aut vindicem locupletem 
ita non dederit, ob e(am) r(em) iudicium recup(erationem) is, quei | 
ibei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), ex h. |. det iudicareique d. e. r. ibei 
curet, ex h. |. n@hilum) r(ogatur). || 

XXII. A quo quid praeter pecuniam certam creditam, signatam 
forma p(ublica) p(opulei) R(omanei), | in eorum quo o. m.c. p. 
f.v.c.c. t. ve quae sunt eruntve in Gallia cis Alpeis, | petetur, 
quodve quom e¢o agetur, quae res non pluris Hs xv erit, et sei | ea 


Eyaront 


Tab. 11 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


SP) 


40 


45 


50 


DD) 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


res erit, de qua re omnei pecunia ibei ius deicei iudiciave darei ex 
h. 1. o(portebit), | sei is eam rem, quae ita ab eo petetur deve ea re 
cum €o agetur, ei quel eam rem || petet deve ea re aget, aut iei quoius 
nomine ab eo petetur quomve eo age|tur in iure apud eum, quei 
ibei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), d(are) f(acere) p(raestare) restituereve 
oportere aut | se debere, eiusve eam rem esse aut se eam habere, 
eamve rem de | qua arguetur se fecisse obligatumve se eius rei 
noxsiaeve esse confes|sus erit deixseritve neque d.e.r. satis utei 
oportebit faciet aut, sei || sponsionem fierei oportebit, sponsionem 
non faciet, aut non restituet, | neque se iudicio utei oportebit de- 
fendet, aut sei d. e. r. in iure | nihil responderit, neque d. e. r. se 
iudicio utei oportebit defendet: | tum de eo a quo ea res ita petetur 
quomve eo d.e.r. ita agetur, deque | eo, quoi eam rem d(arei) 
f(ierel) p(raestarei) restitui satisve d. e. r. fierei oportebit, || s(iremps) 
l(ex) r(es) i(us) c(aussa)q(ue) o(mnibus) o(mnium) r(erum) e(sto), 
atque utel esset esseve oporteret, sei is, quei ita | quid earum rerum 
confessus erit aut d. e. r. non responderit neq(ue) | se iudicio utel 
oportebit defenderit, de ieis rebus Romae apud pr(aetorem) | eumve 
quei de ieis rebus Romae i(ure) d(eicundo) p(rae)esset in iure con- 
fessus esset, | aut ibei d. e. r. nihil respondisset aut iudicio se non 
defendisset; || p(raetor)q(ue) isve quei d(e) e(is) r(ebus) Romae i(ure) 
d(eicundo) p(raerit) in eum et in heredem eius d(e) e(is) r(ebus) 
om|nibus ita ius deicito decernito eosque duci bona eorum possideri | 
proscreibeive veneireque iubeto, ac sei is heresve eius d.e.r. in | 
lure apud eum pr(aetorem) eumve quel Romae i(ure) d(eicundo) 
praesser, confessus es|set aut d.e.r. nihil respondisse¢ neque se 
ludicio utei oportuis||set defendisset; dum ne quis d.e.r. nisei 
pr(aetor) isve quei Romae i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit) | eorum quoius 
bona possiderei proscreibei veneire duceique | eum iubeat. | 

XXIII. Queiquomque in eorum quo o. m.c. p. f. v. c. c. t. ve 
quae in Gal|lia Cisalpeina sunt erunt, i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), is 
inter eos, quei de familllia erceiscunda deividunda iudicium sibei 
darei reddeive | in eorum quo o. m. c. p. f. v. c. c. t. ve, quae s(upra) 
s(cripta) s(unt), postu|laverint, ita ius deicito decernito iudicia dato 
iudicare | iubeto, utei in eo o. m.c. p. f. v.c.c. t. ve, in quo is, 
quoius de boneis agetur, domicilium habuerit..... 


Bronze tablet found in 1760 in the ruins of Veleia, now in 


[ 320 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Parma. ‘The number (1111) at the top of the tablet shows that three 
tablets which preceded it have been lost. Many scholars think that 
this law was passed after 42 B.c.. when Gallia Cisalpina was in- 
corporated into Italy. This is the view held by Savigny (Verm. 
Schr. 3, 319-326, 377-400), by Huschke (Gaius, Beitrdge, 203- 
242), and by Karlowa (1, 440-443). Mommsen on the other 
hand maintains (Ges. Schr. 1, 175-191) that it belongs to the year 
49 B.c. The reference to the region concerned in chap. xx as Gallia 
Cisalpina naturally points to a date earlier than 42 B.c. Mommsen 
holds also that the fragmentum Atestinum (no. 28) is a part of this 
law. Now in the second paragraph of this fragment a /ex rogata 
of L. Roscius is cited by day and month, but the year is not men- 
tioned. From this fact he concludes that the /ex de Gall, Cis. must 
have been passed later in the same year. ‘The /ex Roscia, mentioned 
in the Atestine fragment, belongs, he thinks, to the year 49 B.c., 
in which year L. Roscius was one of the praetors (Caes. B.C. 1. 3). 
The validity of the principal argument rests, therefore, on the relation 
which the fragment of Este bears to our law, and on the attribution 
of the /ex Roscia to the praetor, Roscius. For the serious difficulty 
which this explanation involves, cf. Pais, Ricerche sulla storia e sul 
diritto pubblico di Roma, Serie terza, 389. he theory of Nap, who 
ascribes the law to Sulla’s dictatorship (Themis, 1913, 194 ff.), isade- 
quately refuted by Hardy, Some Problems in Roman History, 207 ff. 

For the connection between the Atestine fragment and our law, 
cf. Hardy, Sex Roman Laws, 110-124, especially 123 f. Whether 
our law is identical with the /ex Rubria, cited twice in the formulae 
in chap. xx, is a matter of high dispute. If it is identical with our 
law, it is a /ex rogata. Mommsen, however, observes (/oc. cit.) that 
the other laws promulgated for a similar purpose were /eges datae, 
and that there are no formulae in our law to prove that it is a /ex 
rogata. He is therefore inclined to think that it is a /ew data and 
consequently distinct from the /ex Rubria. For the opposite view, cf. 
Kipp, Gesch. d. Quellen d. rim. Rechts*, 42, n. 10; Hardy, op. cit. 124. 

This inscription is of great importance for two reasons: (1) It 
gives us the procedure at the beginning of the formulary period 
(on the formulae, cf. Wenger, R.E. 6, 2859 ff.); (2) It gives us the 


most precise information which we have of the lines of demarcation 


AMA [ 321 ] 21 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


between the competence of the central government and of local 
magistrates in Italian communities, made up of Roman citizens, 
in judicial matters. We are concerned here with the second point 
only. The law applied to Gallia Cisalpina the same system long in 
vogue elsewhere in Italy. It was probably called forth by the grant 
of Roman citizenship to Gallia Cisalpina. 

Following in part the system, as analyzed by Hardy (op. ezt. 
117-119), we find that it seems to cover the following points: 
(1) The municipal magistrate has full competence in matters in- 
volving 15,000 sesterces or less; (2) Even where larger amounts 
are at stake, he may take initial proceedings; (3) In certain cases 
he has jurisdiction irrespective of the amount claimed; (4) In the 
absence of a cautio damni infecti (cf. Leonhard, R.E. 3, 1816) the 
municipal magistrate may take action similar to that which would 
have been taken by the praetor peregrinus in like circumstances; 
(5) In certain cases of condemnation for debt, the municipal magis- 
trate may provisionally arrest the debtor and make him addictus 
(cf. Leist, R.E. 1, 352). For the practice at Venafrum, cf. no. 33. 
The local magistrates mentioned are the duoviri, quattuorviri, and 
praefecti (chapp. xx, xx). The praefectus is an official appointed 
in the absence of the regular magistrate. The duovirs were the usual 
magistrates in colonies, the quattuorvirs in municipia (cf. p. 59). 
For a description of the several communities mentioned in the early 
part of chap. xx1, of. pp. 10 ff. The phrase nezve quis magistratus 
prove magistratu netve quis pro quo imperio potestateve erit, etc. 
(chap. xx, end) seems to refer to the proconsul because Gallia 
Cisalpina continued to be a province until 42 B.c. Certain phrases 
indicated by abbreviations in this inscription are d(e) e(a) r(e), gu(a) 
d(e) r(e), h(ac) ege) or the grammatical forms needed in the con- 
nection, and o(ppzdo) m(unicipio) c(olonia) p(raefectura) f(ore) u(eico) 
c(onctliabulo) c(astello) t(erritorio) or the appropriate grammatical 


forms. 
28. FRAGMENTUM ATESTINUM 


(49-42 a. Chr.) 
Notizie degh scavi, 1880, 213; Bruns, 17; Girard, p. 78; Ric- 
cobono, p. 140. 
Quez post hanc legem rogatam in eorum quo oppido municipio colonia 


[ 322 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


pracfectura foro veico concitliabulo castello territoriove, quae in Gallia 
Cisalpeina sunt eruntve, ad ivirum wWi1virum praefectumve in iudt- 
cium fiductae aut pro socio aut mandati aut tutelae suo nomine quodve 
ipse earum rerum | quid gessisse dicetur, adducetur, aut quod furti, 
quod ad ho|minem liberum liberamve pertinere deicatur, aut iniuri|- 
arum agatur: sel Is, a quo petetur quomve quo agetur, d(e) || e(a) 
r(e) In eo municipio colonia praefectura iudicio certa|re volet et 
si ea res HS CCI99 minorisve erit, quo minus ibei d(e) e(a) r(e) | 
ludex arbiterve addicatur detur, quove minus ibei d(e) e(a) r(e) iudi- 
cium ita | feiat, utei de ieis rebus, quibus ex h(ac) l(ege) iudicia | data 
erunt, iudicium fierei exerceri oportebit, ex h.]. n(ihilum) r(ogatur). || 

Quoius rei in queque municipio colonia praefectura | quoiusque 
IIvir(i) elusve, qui ibei lege foedere pl(ebei)ve sc(ito) s(enatus)|ve 
c(onsulto) institutove iure dicundo praefuit, ante legem, sei|ve illud 
pl(ebei) sc(itum) est, quod L. Roscius a. d. v eid. Mart. populum | 
plebemve rogavit, quod privatim ambigetur, iuris dictz||o iudicis 
arbitri recuperatorum datio addictiove fuit | quantaeque rei pequni- 
aeve fuit: elus rei pequnzaeve | quo magis privato Romae revocatio 
sit quove |mznus quei ibei i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) d(e) e(a) r(e) 
ius dicat iudicem arlitrumve det | utei ante legem, sive illud pl(ebei) 
sc(itum) est, guod L. Roscius a. d. || v eidus Mart. populum plebemve 
rogauit, | ab eo quet thet i(ure) d(ecundo) p(raerit) tus dici iudicem 
arbitrumve dart oportuit, ex h(ac) Kege) n(thilum) r(ogatur). 

Bronze tablet found in 1880 at Ateste in Cisalpine Gaul, now 
in the museum at Este. Mommsen held that it contained a fragment 
of the /ex de Gallia Cisalpina (no. 27); cf. Ges. Schr. 1, 175-191. 
This view has been opposed by Alibrandi, Opere giuridiche, 1, 395 ff-; 
Karlowa, 1, 441; Kriiger, Gesch. d. Quellen, 73; Esmein, AZélanges 
d histotre et du droit, 269-292; Appleton, Revue générale du droit, 
24 (1900), 193 ff., and Kipp, Gesch. d. Quellen’®, 42, n. 10. The 
main objection to Mommsen’s theory lies in the fact that the /ex 
de Gall, Cis. grants municipal magistrates full competence in suits 
involving not more than 15,000 sesterces, whereas in this fragment, 
in certain cases, at least, the maximum Is set at 10,000. The date 
is uncertain. Some editors think that it deals with the enfranchise- 
ment of all communities south of the Po after the Social war, in 
spite of the fact that the tablet was found in the Transpadane region, 


[. 323°] 21-2 


Io 


T5 


20 


On 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


and they attribute the /ex Roscia, mentioned in it, to Roscius, 
tribune in 67 B.c. Those who regard the fragment as part of the 
lex de Gall. Cis. put it in the year 49 B.c., while still others date it 
as not earlier than 49 or later than 42 B.c. 

The purpose of the law was to make certain changes in com- 
petence necessitated by the granting of new rights. In some cases, 
at least, involving a sum not exceeding 10,000 sesterces, the accused 
has the option of bringing his case before the municipal magistrate, 
and revocatio Romae is limited, temporarily or permanently, in its 
application in some circumstances. 

The nine classes of communities which are mentioned in no. 27, 
chap. xx1, and which Mommsen has included among the missing 
words at the beginning of this fragment, are reduced to three in the 
second paragraph of the fragment, because a local magistrate had 
judicial competence in a municipium, colonia, and praefectura only. 
‘The powers of a local magistrate may rest on any one of three 
different bases, according to the second paragraph of the fragment. 
‘They may be granted by a treaty (foedere), by an enactment of the 
popular assembly or senate (/ege, plebez scito, senatus consulto), or 
traditional usage (stituto) may be continued in force without 
special legal authorization. The phrase ante legem, setve illud plebet 
scitum est, quod L. Roscius...rogavit implies that the Roscian law 
was a plebiscitum, and, consequently makes it difficult to connect 
this measure with the praetor L. Roscius of 49 B.c., but Mommsen 
believes that the bill in question was submitted to the plebeian 
assembly by the praetor (St. R. 3, 159, n. 2), and he calls attention 
to a parallel phrase in the /ex Bantina (CIL. 1, 197, ll. 7, 15). 


29. EPISTULAE ANTONI ET CAESARIS AD 
PLARASENSES ET APHRODISIENSES 


(39-35 a. Chr.) 

CIG. 27373; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 5; Bruns, 43; Ditt. Or. Gr. 
453-4553 Riccobono, p. 217. 

[Mapxos ’Avtdvios Mapxov vids attoxpatwp tiratos azo- 
deder]|yuévos TO B’ Kal [7d ¥ | rév] tprdv avdpav rh[s] | Tov 
Snmociwy mpalyuatwv diatakews || WAapacéwy cat “Adpo|de- 
aléwy apxovow | BovrAme SHuwe yaiperv. | Ei éppwoGe, ed av 


[ 324 ] 


Io 


5 


20 


25 


30 


5h 
40 


45 


50 


Re) 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


y € / \ \ RR \ a Ai f 
Elyour bytaive Sé Kal || adrds peta Tod oTpalTeduatos. Yorov | 
Anpntplov twérepos | tperBeuTns, ére|wereoTtata Teppor||tiKwsS 
TOV THS To|hews Uwaov mpay|uat@v, ov povoy | HpKécOn eri 
Tots | yeyovdow otkovol|[un|uaciv, adda Kal | Huds TwapeKa- 
Neclev els TO TOD yeyo|voTos bpety érs|KpipaTtos Kal Soyyal|Tos 
Kal opkiov Kal vo|you avrimepovnpe|va éx Tov Snpociwr | 
dér\T ov éEatroaret|Nas bpeiv TA avTiypal|pa. "E@’ ois ératvéloas 

\ S / A b) / 7 b) a CL AT 9 a 
TOV Lohwva pad| ov aTedeEaunv éo| ov TE EV TOLS UT EMOU | 
yelvmaKkopevors, || os Kal TA KAOnKOVTA | aTreu“épioa pidrav|Opwra, 
aEvov nyn|odpuevos tov avldpa ths €& nudy teu||uns, buety Te 
culyndomas ert Tat éyew | TovodTov Trodeitny. | "Koti dé avTi- 
ypaha | Trav yeyovotwr t||uciv diravOperwy | Ta vToyeypap- 
péva: | & twas Bovropmar | év tots Snuocios | Tois rap’ vpeir || 
ypaupacw évtaéat. 

Tpdupata Kaicapos 
[........| S¢]eava éoOra te [mwordr]a érevOépous ecivas, THL 
rs \ aA 4 a 2Q7 \ , \ 

[re] dexaiws xai tats [kpiceow rats idiars THY To|Auyv] THY 
TThapacéwv cai Adpoderorvéwv xpynoOat unre éyyvny e[is ‘Paunv 
avuTous Kata Sdyua Te | Kjat KéXevowv oporoyeiv’ & TE Tia 
érabna Texas piravOpa[ma............%.Tpels avdpes | ot 
THS TOV Snpocimy tpayuatov Svatakews Tat (dims émixpipate 
TlA[apacetdor cai’ Adpodsoced||or] tpocepepicav mpocpepsovary, 
cuvexopnoay cuvywpnoovaty, TalbTa mavta Kvpta eivas | vy jevé- 
aOat. “Opoiws te apécKen THL cuyKAnTwL, TOY SHmwov TOV 
IIda[pacéwy Kai “Adpodecaté| |wv thv éXevOepiay Kal tHv aré- 
Netayv avTovs TavTwv TaV Tpay[patav eyew KapTriverOa, | 
KaOlarep Kat Tis TodLTElLa THL KaACTwOL StKalML KAN CTL 
Te vowwr éotiv, [Tus Tapa tov | dyipuoly tod ‘Pwpyaiwy tiv 
5) / \ \ > f ” } \ / / 
éNevOepiav Kal Thy atérevav Exes Pir Te Kal cv[upayos yeryé||- 
vntat. “O te] Téwevos Oeds “Adpoditns év more Ldapacéwv 

S, > / 4 n yy ” ? lal 
kat “Adpoderotéw[y xabtépwrtat, Todto | dovdov élotw TavTar 
(rat) Sixaiwr TadThe Te Serocarpovias, we Sixaiws cab He Seco[u- 
Saypoviar Apréus|dos “Edelotas éotiv év “Edéoar, KvKdwt TE 
éxeivou Tov lepod elite Téuevos eit[e AAcos éaTiv, od|Tos o| 

, ” y wi OR ¢e / \ € a 
Tomos adavros éoTw. “Omrws TE 1 TOoALS Kal ol TroNEtTAL 
of IIkapacéwv [kai “Adpodercicwv | we? lv copay yopiov 


[ 325 ] 


15 


Io 


15 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


dXUpwudtav 6pav Tpocdday mpos THY didtav To[d Snuov Tpoc- 
HrAVov, tadra || éyoolw xpatdow ypeovtTat KapTifwrtai Te 
TavToV Tpaypwatov ate[Acts dvTEs. Mnbé twa| Popov b]va Tiva 
aitlay éxelvwv Sidovae pndé [a ]uvecohépery odetrwowy, [adr 
avtol 7a|ou TovT lous KaT ovcaY peTa TAadTA év EavTOls KYpwoLY 
xpor[ tas kaptifwvra: Kpat@ow. *Kédo€kev |. 

From Aphrodisias in Caria. The union of two cities in a common 
polity is not unusual. Plarasa and Aphrodisias issued coinage 
jointly (Head, Hust. Numm. 530). The third document engraved 
on the stone is the decree of the senate ratifying the acts of the 
triumvirs. Aphrodisias is mentioned by Pliny (N.H. 5. 109) as 
a free state. By this decree freedom was conferred, and exemption 
from tribute granted. The citizens could not be compelled to give 
bail for appearance before a court in Rome. The shrine of Aphrodite 
enjoyed the same rights of asylum as that of Diana at Ephesus (cf. 
Tac. Ann. 3. 61). The revenues from the territorzum were granted 
to the city without any liability to tribute. For the status of free 


cities, cf. pp. 39 ff. 


30. EPISTULA AUGUSTI AD MYLASENSES 
(31 a. Chr.) 

Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 6; Ditt. Sy//.3 768. 

Avroxpatwp Kaicap Qeo0 “louvniov | vids brrarés Te TO TpiTov 
xaber|tapévos Muracéwr apxovor Bov|Ane Syuwe yaipev. Ki 
éppwobe x[a]||as av éyou" Kat avtos dé wera t[ov] | otpated- 
patos Uytawov. Kali rpo]|tepov pev 48n rept THs Kat[acyou ]|- 
ons Upas TUXNS TpoceTTEe[mrpaTé] | pol, Ka VOY Tapayevoméva| Vv 
tov | || mpecBevtav, OvALad[ov. . | 

..§ TOV TOAEWioV TTaicat Kal TpaTr[Oei]|ons THs TodEws, 
TOANOVS EV aixwarwTo[us] | amroBadiv TodiTas, ovK drlyoUS 
pev hovevdé[y || tas, Teds S€ Kat cvveatapreye(v Tas TH TOAE| ¢], || 
THS TOV TOAELLMY WLOTNTOS OVSE TAY | VadV OSE TAY lepav TaV 
ayiwtatov a|torxopuévns vmédiEav 5é ot Kal Trept | THs yopas 
THS NeXenraTnuEevns Kal THY | éTravAEwY TOY éuTreTpnopévor, 
@aote eu || Taow bpas nTvxnKévar: ef’ ols taow auve[é|dov 
maGovras| Tatta mdons Tevuns Kal xapt|[Tos akiovs advdpas 
yevouey jous vas re[pi ‘Pwpatous .. | 


[ 326 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


From Mylasa. Unfortunately the major portion of the letter 
of Augustus is lost, and we cannot determine precisely its content, 
but it is probable that the Mylasans were given the rank of a free 
city (Pliny, N.H. 5. 108; cf. CIG. 26954). The city of Mylasa 
had been occupied by the troops of Labienus nine years before. 
During a festival the soldiers were massacred by the citizens, who 
abandoned their homes when Labienus advanced against them. 
He rased the city to the ground (Cassius Dio, 48. 26; Strabo, 14. 2. 
24, p. 660). Cf. nos. 32, 133. 


31. TITULUS OPERIS PUBLICI 
(31 a. Chr.) 

Notizie deg scavt, 1915, 139; An. ép. 1916, no. 60. 

Decuria | Q. Arrunti | Surai, cur(atoribus) | Q. Arruntio || 
C. Sabello | Pig(neratore) IT. Arrio. | Sum(ma) h(ominum) xcrrx. | 
In sing(ulos) hom(ines) | op(eris) p(edes) xx111. S||(umma) p(edum) 
00 IDDCCXIV. 

Found at Saletto di Montagnana near Este in 1907. It refers 
to work performed by veterans, after the battle of Actium, in building 
levees along the river Atesis near Ateste. Another inscription from 
Ateste refers to the same matter (CIL. v, 2603). “To carry out the 
work the soldiers were divided into squads, each one of them bearing 
the name of some leader. This squad took the name of Q. Arruntius 
Sura, who was also one of the overseers. In it were ninety-eight 
men, and to each man forty-three feet were assigned. This is one 
of the earliest of those great constructive works carried out by 
soldiers, from which the provincial cities profited so much under 
the empire, and of which we have so many records in Africa; cf. 
nos. 72 and 103. 


32. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS, VEL PROCONSULIS, 
AD MYLASENSES 
(ca. 30 a. Chr.) 
Le Bas-Waddington, 3. 442-443; CIG. 2695, 27008. 
phi es Bice 8 baer i eR Le kat [tas vrép tov Snuociar | 
[émre]etynoeus(?) els Te Tov Kowov [THs] Toews Kapha oY TLVOV 
avala|ra oes brrovobevery, ots 67 Kav érri[Tpé |rr@pev Poporoyetv 


[ 327 ] 


a 


oO 


Id 


Io 


15 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


tHv [Mv]|Aacéwv modu els SovrcKny wepilou]oiav, juety per av 
lows je éd[opalllow aicypa Te kai nudv avakios, al dv lvatos dé 
dv 6uws Kakei[v]|ous yévotto tpd[.a |oovar Snuociattovs Onpwociat 
cuptous, pl) ]|Te XPNHAaT@V pHTE Tpoc0da[Vy] Snwooiwy wroKEl- 
pérlw]|v, ef pr Kata TEX@V erriperriy Noy[iC]ev Tods évds 
éxdotov.....| us Tas Te Kepadas ert TEAMY EL... OédoLEV, TIS 
Torews ove é THY] || erravepPwowy Tdv éx THS NaBinvo[v]AnaTHas 
épevtriwvy étoipas a[v]ladepovons, 0 6) Kat avtot mpoidopue[vor | 
mpodaveta pots idtwTav [eis] | ypéa Synwdota THY ToALY UTNYAa- 
yo[v]to, ov dua TO Kal’ vradrayily ava|A|ouatwv(t) THv 
Kaicapos tmép Mvuaacélov........... 1| 

From Mylasa. Cf. no. 30. This document appears to be a part 
of a letter of some emperor or governor relative to the collection of . 
taxes or tribute, but the interpretation is exceedingly obscure. The 
letter probably belongs to a period not much later than no. 30. 


33. EDICTUM AUGUSTI DE AQUAEDUCTU VENAFRANO 
(17-11 a. Chr.) 


CIL. x, 4842; Bruns, 77; Girard, p. 186; Riccobono, p. 316; 
Dessau, 5743. 


Edictum imp(eratoris) Caesaris Augusti (finis huius versus et prae- 
hered sex fered LOtt) SUAUUCUTL)—— sinh path Poids ny pelotssl opt a ope aare oaks 
Venafranorum nomine....... tus sit liceatque. 

Qui rivi specus saepta fontes..........04. que aquae ducendae 
reficiundae || causa supra infrave libram factz aedificati structi sunt, 
sive quod | aliut opus eius aquae ducendae refzczundae causa supra 
infrave libram | factum est, uti quidquid earum rerum factum est, 
ita esse habere itaque | reficere reponere restituere resarcire semel 
saepius, fistulas canales | tubos ponere, aperturam committere, sive 
quid aliut eius aquae ducen||dae causa opus erit, facere placet: dum 
qui locus ager in fundo, qui | Q. Sirini (?) L. f. Ter. est esseve 
dicitur, et in fundo, qui L. Pompei M. f. ‘Ter. Sullae | est esseve 
dicitur, maceria saeptus est, per quem locum subve quo loco | specus 
elus aquae pervenit, ne ea maceria parsve quae elus maceriae | aliter 
diruatur to//atur, quam specus reficiundi aut inspiciendi caullsa; 
neve quid thi privati sit, quominus ea aqua ire fluere ducive possit | 


[ 328 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


...... Dextra sinistraque circa eum rivom circaque | ea opera, quae 
eius aquae ducendae causa facta sunt, octonos pedes agrum | vacuom 
esse placet, per quem locum Venafranis eive, qui Venafranorum | 
nomine......., iter facere elus aquae ducendae operumve elus 
aquae || ductus factendorum reficiendorum causa, quod eius s(ine) 
d(olo) m(alo) fiat, ius sit liceatque, | quaeque earum rerum cuius 
faciendae reficiendae causa opus erunt, quo | proxume poterit 
advehere adferre adportare, quaeque inde exempta erunt, | quam 
maxime aequaliter dextra sinistraque p. vil iacere, dum ob eas res 
damnz | infecti iurato promittatur. Earumque rerum omnium ita 
habendarum || colon(is) (?) Venafranis ius potestatemque esse 
placet, dum ne ob id opus domi|nus eorum cuius agri locive, per 
quem agrum locumve ea aqua ire fluere | ducive solet, invius fat; 
neve ob id opus minus ex agro suo in partem agri | quam transire 
transferre transvertere recte possit; neve cui eorum, per quorum 
agros ea aqua ducitur, eum aquae ductum corrumpere abducere 
aver||tere facereve, quo minus ea aqua in oppidum Venafranorum 
recte duci | fluere possit, liceat. | 

Quaeque aqua in oppidum Venafranorum it fluit ducitur, eam 
aquam | distribuere discribere vendundi causa, aut ei rei vectigal 
inponere consti|tuere, 11viro Iviris praefec(to) praefectis elus co- 
loniae ex maioris partis decuri|jonum decreto, quod decretum ita 
factum erit, cum in decurionibus non | minus quam duae partes 
decurionum adfuerint; legemque ei dicere ex | decreto decurionum, 
quod ita ut supra scriptum est decretum erit, ius po|testatemgue 
esse placet; dum ne ea aqua, quae ita distributa discripta deve qua | 
ita decretum erit, aliter quam fistulis plumbeis d(um) t(axat) ab 
rivo p(edes) t ducatur; neve || eae fistulae aut rivos nisi sub terra, 
quae terra itineris viae publicae limi|tisve erit, ponantur conlocentur; 
neve ea aqua per locum privatum in|vito eo, cuius is locus erit, 
ducatur. Quamque legem ei aquae tuendae ope|ribusve, quae eius 
aquae ductus ususve causa facta sunt erunt, tuendis | zrverz praefecti 
ex decurion(um) decreto, quod ita ut s(upra) s(criptum) e(st) factum 


erit, dixerint, || eam... ..firmam ratamque esset placet | (undectm 
UCK SUS CUANIAL [ACtI).. 6 coer aie dele side waleie M ENALTANAES So. 65 cers 
......atio quam colono aut incolae....|....da......1s Cul ex 


gotium datum 





decreto decurionum ita, ut supra comprensum est, ne| 


32981 


25 


30 


oh 


40 


45 


590 


65 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


erit, agenti, tum, qui inter civis et peregrinos ius dicet, iudicium | 
reciperatorium in singulas res Hs. x reddere, testibusque dumtaxat x 
denun|tiando guaeri placet; dum reciperatorum reiectio inter eum 
qui aget et | eum quocum agetur ita flet, ut ex lege, quae de iudicis 
privatis lata est, | licebit oportebit. 

On a block of marble at Venafrum. Venafrum is one of the 
twenty-eight colonies established in Italy by Augustus (cf Suet. 
Aug. 46), as its name, colonia Augusta lulta (cf. CIL. x, 4894, 48753 
Lh. colon. 239. 7) indicates. These colonies, Suetonius says (4ug. 
46), (Augustus) operibus ac vectigalibus publicis plurifariam instruxit. 
Very likely his gift to the colony was recorded in the first paragraph 
of the inscription. There is no reference in it to the penalties 
established by the /ex Quinctia de aquaeductibus (cf. Bruns, 22) of 
9 B.c., and the settlement of disputes is referred to the peregrine 
praetor (cf. 1. 65, gui inter civis et peregrinos ius dicet), and not to the 
curatores aquarum, who took charge of such matters after I1 B.C.; 
cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 3, 97. On the other hand the /ex de 
iudicis privatis of the last paragraph is probably a /ex Iulia of 17 B.c. 
(cf. Wlassak, Rém. Processgesetze, 1, 173-188). Therefore the in- 
scription falls between 17 and 11 B.c. The document is an edict. 
No mention is made in it of the co-operation of the Roman senate; 
cf. Mommsen, op. cit. 3, 81. From this document it is clear (cf. 
l. 38, vendundi causa) that private persons did not receive water 
free in the municipalities, as they did in Rome, but they were 
charged a rental (cf Mommsen, op. cit. 3, 91), and the proceeds 
were covered into the local treasury; cf. p. 138. The distribution 
of the water was under the control of the magistrates and decurions, 
and the importance of the matter is indicated by the fact that the 
presence of a quorum of two-thirds of the decurions was required 
to make the action legal; cf. pp. 67 f. The most interesting point in 
the inscription for us is the fact that the adjudication of offenses 
is referred to Rome, not to the local magistrates. This is a logical 
outcome of the fact that the aqueduct was given to the city by 
Augustus. It is possible that cases involving a fine less than 10,000 
sesterces were heard by the local magistrates. In the /ex de Gallia 
Cisalpina of 49-42 B.c., the municipal officials had full competence 
_ in matters involving 15,000 sesterces or less; cf. no. 27. It is 


[Egacne] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


probable, as Mommsen remarks (op. cit. 3, 96), that the Roman 
practice in this matter varied from place to place. With the establish- 
ment of the empire, gifts were more and more frequently made to 
the cities by the emperor, and this precedent shows us how these 
donations gave the central government the natural right to take 
part in the conduct of local affairs. 


34. DECRETUM CONCILI ASIAE 
DE FASTIS PROVINCIALIBUS 
(ca. 9 a. Chr.) 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 458, ll. 78 ff-5 Inschriften von Priene, 105. 

"Edo€£ev trois emi tis “Acias"EdAnow, yudune Tod apyrepéws 
"AtrodAwviov Tod | Myvodirov Afeaveirou: érel tHv véav vov- 
enviav del det Eoravat Thy adtr[y] || drracw THs eis TAS apyas 
elaooou Kata te TO IlavAov PaBlov Maéipov tod av|Ouratou 
dtatayua Kal TO THs ’Acta(s) Whidiopa évrrodiferar S€ 4 TOD 
xpovou | Takis Tapa Tas év Tols apyaspecions emeKAHCELS, yel- 
verGar Ta KaTa Ta | apyatpéota pyri Sexata., os Kai év TOL 
Kopynrio vopor yéypat rat, évros | Sexarns totapévov. 

From Priene. We have omitted the first 77 lines of the inscription 
carved on this stone. Paullus Fabius Maximus, proconsul of Asia, 
wrote to the provincial assembly urging the council to adopt the 
natal day of Augustus as the beginning of the official year in the 
province, and to change from the lunar to the solar reckoning of 
the Julian calendar. The assembly adopted the recommendation 
enthusiastically as a means of conferring honor upon the deified 
emperor. Copies of the decree were ordered to be engraved and 
set up in the different cities. In addition to the copy from Priene, 
others have been found at Apamea (CIG. 3957), Dorylaeum (C/L. 
I, 13651), Eumenia (CIG. 39024), and Maeonia (Denkschriften 
der Wiener Akademie, 54 (1911), 80 ff.). The part of the document 
which we have included in this collection is a second decree of the 
provincial assembly regulating the elections of municipal magistrates 
under the revised calendar according to the Sullan constitution. 
The Sullan era had been adopted by many of the cities of Asia, 
probably those whose constitutions he had remodelled. According 


Fagan 


78 


80 


n 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


to the Sullan law elections must be held fifty days before the be- 
ginning of the civil year. This arrangement was doubtless made to 
allow sufficient time for the settlement of appeals in the case of 
candidates who did not wish to serve in the office to which they had 
been elected. Very little is known of the Sullan constitution. It 
regulated the duties of the governor (Cic. ad fam. 1. 9. 253 3. 6. 3, 6) 
and the administration of the municipalities (Cic. ad fam. 3. 10. 6), 
and apparently defined the privileges of free cities (4th. Mitth. 24 


(1899), 234, no. 74). 


35. EPISTULA P. CORNELI SCIPIONIS, PROCONSULIS 
ASIAE, AD THYATIRENOS 
(7-6 a. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1211; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 8. 


IlomAcos Kopynrcos 2[xeriwy avOvrratos ‘Papaiwr] | Ovares- 
pnvots apyovo[s BovrAne dnuwe yaipery]. | Aicasov etvar vopifm 


PED TET a ha Sa A Oy A o>] | Kal voptpov éoriv tTLas yevopuévas vTrép 
Tov le||ljpav ypnuatay Kpicelis.....--. llyns Secactay Kedev- 
Leos kat ov||dév mdéov tots émexad[oupévors....... 
bre ||pwvnbeios TO mwapaBor[tov....... ola jola]n rots huyode- 
OVO bah! Oson Le easeaciar EUNV ATAVTA........4- \[e ]conynoa- 
pévov Avrovu ‘Pav(i)o[u.......... 


The subject of this fragmentary letter of the provincial governor 
to the citizens of Thyatira is obscure. Apparently the temple-lands 
had been leased for a high rental and the lessees had brought suit 
for an abatement of the terms. It would seem that the decision of 
the court had been unacceptable to the Thyatirans and they had 
persisted in holding the lessees to their contract. The latter had 
appealed to the governor, and he urged the city to abide by the 
decision of the court or of the arbiters. Cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. 
proc. d’ Asie, 128, n. I. 


[agaas 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


36. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS AUGUSTI AD CNIDIOS 
(6 a. Chr.) 

Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 9; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1031; IG. xm, 
330745) Ditte Syil2 330. 

[..].. dapslwopyod dé Kaspoyéveos Aev[ xa ]Péou (2). 

Avtoxpatap Kaicap Oeod vids SeBacrtos, apysepevs, | bratos To 
dwdéxaTtov aTrodeberypévos | Kai Onwapyixhs €Eovatas TO OKT@LKaL- 
déxaTor, || Kyidtav dpxover, BovrAnt, dnwwr xaipew. Oi rpéa| Bes 
bpav Avoviavos B’ kai Atovictos B Tov Acovulaiou évérvyou év 
‘Paépne pot, kal 70 Whgdiopa atrodovtes | katnyopnoav EvBovrov 
pev TOV Avakavopioa TeOver|@Tos Hn, Tpudépas b€ THs yuva.Kds 





"Eyou | d¢ éEerdcat tpootagéas Vardar Acivios TH: Euds Pirwr | 
an >] n \ > / fal > , \ 
TOV OLKETOV TOUS EvhEpomévous THe aitia dia Balodvwy éyvov 
an \ / an lal 
Pireivoy tov Xpvoirrov tpels vi|xtas cuveyas éredndAvbdta 
THe oixtas THe EvBov||dov xai Tpudépas wcO UBpews nal tporae 
Tit TrodLlopKias, THe TpiTHL SE oUVETHIYMEVOY Kal TOV adenr| pov 
KvPovror, tovs b€ THs oixias Seamrotas EVBov|dov cat Tovdépar, 
@s ote ypnuatiCovtes mpos | TOV PDireivoy ovTe avTippaTTo- 
pevot Tais mpoo||Borais acdanetas év THe EavT@v oiKia tuyeiv 
novvav|To, TpoTTETAaYOTAS EVL TOV OLKETHY OVK ATroKTEl|VaL, ws 
/ ” € RS an > »Q/ / > > > A 
lows dy Tus vm opyhs ov[K] adixov mponxOnt, ad|ra avetpEar 
KaTacKEbdcavTa Ta KOTTpLa avT@Y* TOV | O€ oiKéTHY adY Tots 
KaTayeouévors elite ExovTa || elTe AkovTAa—avTOs pev yap évé- 
pevvev apvovpevo[s | |—adetvar thv yadortpay, [Kall Tov EXBovrov 
uTrotreceiy Sixaso|[T lepov dv cwOévta taiedpov. Ilérovda Se 
€ ta) \ > \ \ > / > V4 ed an > 
ipeiv Kai alvd|tlas tas avaxpioes. “EOavpaloy & av, ras eis 
/ SA \ Ee la > / la / id / 
Tocov | éecav THY Tap vpelv eEeraciay THY SovrOr of d[evl|- 
\ , > / l SUR PSS Nh \ 
yovtes THY Sixny, eb pH Trot ohodpa avtois éd0€[ ate] | yaderrol 
yeyovévat Kai mpos Ta évavTia pLoorrovr| por], | wn Kata TOV 
> / an ¢ lal va b] 3 ? / Bay . SY 
akiov Tav oTLovy TraGetv, éw addol[Tpiar] | oikiav viKTwp we 
UBpews cal Bias tpls éwernrv[O0]|T@v cal tiv Kowny aravT@v 
pov acddrecap [avar|||povvTw@y ayavayTodyTes, AAAA KATA TOV 
OM fone / > le 6 / be 10 ” 7 
Kat nv[ix« 7 || wvvovTo HTVXNKOTOV, NOLKNKOTwWY Oé OVS éat[LV 0,76]. 
aX X n > @ an BY A & A an n b] an \ / 
| "AAA viv pOds dv por Soxette ToLHoas THe euhe [Tept Tov || Tov 
yvoune TpovoncavTes Kat Ta év TOs Onulocioss] | buadv oporo- 
yelv ypaupata. “Eppwole. 


eseaat 


5 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


On 


Io 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


This inscription, containing the letter of Augustus to the 
Cnidians and the letter of Trajan to the Astypalaeans (no. 75), was 
found at Astypalaea. The letter of Augustus deals with the appeal 
of Eubulus and Tryphera to the emperor. ‘They were residents of 
Cnidus, a free town, and a slave in their household had accidentally 
killed a Cnidian who had assailed their house. As public opinion 
was against them, they feared to submit themselves to the juris- 
diction of the local court and they fled to Rome. The Cnidians 
sent an embassy to Augustus with a decree of the city accusing 
the fugitives and demanding their extradition or punishment. The 
emperor instructed the governor of Asia to investigate. When he 
made his report, Augustus rendered a decision acquitting the accused 
and rebuking the Cnidians for their attitude towards Eubulus and 
Tryphera (cf. Mommsen, Roman Provinces, 1, 352, n. 1; Chapot, 
La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 126 f.). Free cities had jurisdiction 
over civil and criminal cases in their own courts, but the right of 
appeal to the emperor, granted to all citizens of the empire, marks 
the lessening of the power of local magistrates. This development 
was intensified, when, as at Cnidus, the local courts were swayed 
by partisan prejudice. Cf. nos. 25, 40. 


37. IUSIURANDUM PAPHLAGONUM 
(3 a. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 137; Ditt. Or. Gr. 532. 

"Amd Adtoxpatopos Kaic[apos]| | Qe0d viod YeBacrod bra- 
tev[ovtos TO] | Sdwdéxatrov Etous TpiTov, m[potépar] | vwavav 
Maptiwv év Tayypous év [t]a[yopae] dp||cos 0 tereaO[ets b]rd 
to[v] Kcatotx[ovvtav Ma]|prayovialy Kai tov mpay]uarevo- 
pLévwv tral|p’ avrots ‘Plwpaiwy]. | “Ouriw Aia, Viv, “Hrx0ov, 
Geovs wavtal[s Kat ma]|cas Kal adrov tov LeBao[t lov, edvor- 
[cew Kai]||joaps YeBaotas nai trois tLéx]vous éyyo[vors re] | 
avtov rdv[ tla [Tov Tod [Biov] xpovor x[ai AO]|yar [x ]ai Epyos 
Kai yvoulne, pilrous Hyov[pevos] | ods av exetvor jyovtalc] 
éxy Opous Te v[opifer] | ods dv avtol Kpivwow, trép Té THY t[ov- 
Tots] || Svadepdvtwy ponte c@patos deioeoOlar wun ]|Te Wryijs 
unre Biov pnte téxvwov, ada Tav]|Ti Tporar brép Tay] 
éxelvors avnko[vt@y] | mavta Kivduvvov vmopéverv: Ste te Afv 


[ 334 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


aic||Owpas 4) akovow vrevavtioy TovT[ols re|||youevov 7) Bov- 20 
Nevowevoy 1) Tpacco| pevov,| | TOUTO éyunvicery TE Kal eyOpov 
éa[ecOar Tae] | NéyovTs 7 Bovrevopévar 7) Tpdoco[yti Ts Tov-| 
Tov ovs Te dv ExYOpods adt[oll Kpiv[wauy, Tov]|ToOVs KaTAa YhV 
kal Oaraccav brrolts Te] || Kat cLdnpar diwEEL Kalb awuVeEi- 25 
a[Oa.] | Kav S€ te vrevavtioy tovtas tL au bpxw.] | Toncw 7 
“Ln oToryovvTes Kalals wpolloa, éemapmpmar avTos Te KAT Emov 
Kat o[@pa]|tos ToD ewavTod Kai :uyfs Kat Biov Kall Té]||kv@v 30 
Kal TavTos ToD éwavTov yév[ous] | Kal cuvdépovtos é&odevav 
Kat tavl@nret|lav wéeypt maons dvadoyns THs [uns Kal] | Tov && 
éuod mavrov, Kal unte a[opata Ta] | Tov éuav  é& éuod pnTe 
yf w[nTte Odrac|\|loa déEarto pndé Kaptrovs évéy[Kot adtots.] | 35 

Kata Ta avta @pooav Kai ot élv THe ywpat] | mavTes ev Tots 
kata Tas w[mapyias Xe]|Bactyos mapa tois Bwpoils tov 
LeBarrov:] | opotws te Paliwwveitas ot [tHv vdv Nearro]||Aw 40 
Neyouevnv KaToiKovr[ Tes Buooav aupl|ravTes ev LeBaotywe 
Tapa t[a@t Bwucs tov] | LeBacrod. 

From Phazimon (Neoclaudiopolis) in Paphlagonia. Paphlagonia 
was organized as a province of the empire in 6 B.c. The oath of 
loyalty to Augustus was taken three years later at Gangra, the seat 
of provincial government, and the same oath was administered 
throughout the province at the altars of Augustus. The restoration 
b[ wapyxias | in |. 37 is due to Reinach, and is conditionally accepted 
by Dittenberger. The hyparchy was the ancient satrapy (Hausoul- 
lier, Rev. Philol. 25 (1901), 22 ff.). Dittenberger suggests that the 
term may be applied to a conventus under the Roman administration. 
For similar oaths, cf. nos. 47, 48. Phazimon was raised from a village 


to a city by Pompey (Strabo, 12. 3. 38, p. 560). 
38. RES GESTAE DIVI AUGUSTI 
(28 a. Chr.—6 p. Chr.) 
CIL, 111, pt. 1, pp. 769 ff; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 158. 
Chap. 3 (= col. 1, ll. 16 ff). 
Millia civium Romazorum adacta sacramento meo fuerunt cir- 


citer guingen|ta. Ex quibus deduxz zz colonias aut remisi in municipia 
sua stipendis emeri|tis millia aliquanto p/ura guam trecenta et 


Epics 


25 


30 


40 


30 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


lis omnibus agros adszgnavi | aut pecuniam pro praemis militiae 


dedi. 


Chap. 15 (= col. 1, ll. 17 ff). 
In colonzs militum meorum consul quintum ex manibiis viritim| 
millia nummum singula dedi; acceperunt id triumphale congiarium | 
in colovis hominum circiter centum et viginti millia. 


Chap. 16 (= col. rz, Il. 22 7f,). 

Pecuniam pro agris, quos in consulatu meo quarto et postea 
consulibus | M. Crasso et Cn. Lentulo augure adsignavi militibus, 
solvi municipis. Ea | summa sestertium circiter sexsiens milliens 
fuit, quam pro Italicis || praedzs numeravi, et circiter bis mil- 
lzens et sescentiens, quod pro agris | provincialibus solvi. Id primus 
et solus omnium, qui deduxerunt | colonias militum in Italia aut 
in provincis, ad memorzam aetatis | meae feci. Et postea Ti. Nerone 
et Cn. Pisone consulibus, itemgue C. Antistio | et D. Laelio cos., 
et C. Calvisio et L. Pasieno consulibus, et L. Lentulo et M. 
Messalla || consulibus, et L. Caninio et Q. Fabricio cos. militzbus, 
quos eme|riteis stipendis in sua municipia deduxi, praemia nume- 
rato | persolvi, quam in rem sestertzum quater milliens Lbenter | 
impendi. | 


Chap. 18 (= col. m1, Il. 40 ff). 

Inde ab eo anno, quo Cn. et P. Lentuli consules fuerunt, cum 
deficerent | vectigalia, tum centum millibus ham:num tum pluribus 
inlato fru|mento vel ad nummarios tributus ex agro et patrimonio 
meo opem tult. 


Chap. /2.1 {=‘coljav,abi2o jf-). 

Auri coronari pondo triginta et quin|que millia municipiis et 
colonis Italiae conferentibus ad triumphos | meos quintum consul 
remisi, et postea, quotienscumque imperator appel|latus sum, aurum 
coronarium non accepi decernentibus municipiis || et colonis aeque 
benigne adque antea decreverant. | 


[ 336 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 
Chap. 28 (= col. v, ll. 35 fF). 


Colonias in Africa Sicilia Macedonia utraque Hispania Achaia 35 
Asia Syria | Gallia Narbonensi Piszdia militum deduxi. Italia 
autem xxvii coloni|as, quae vivo me celeberrimae et frequentis- 
simae fuerunt, mers auspicis | deductas habet. | 


Suppl., chap. 4. 

[Aam]dvar &€ | eis Oéas Kai povouayous Kal dOAnTAas Kai vav- 
palyiav kal Onpopaxiav dwpeai [re] arroixiats Tonreow | év 
‘Itanrta, worecw év érrapxelats cerap@ Kall] éviru||ptouots memo- 5 
ynkvtass } Kat avdpa diros Kat cvy|KANTLKOLS, OV TAS TELUNoELS 
mpoceteTTAnpwaenv | TreLpov TAOS. | 

This document was originally cut on bronze tablets and placed 
in front of the mausoleum of Augustus in Rome. Kornemann 
(Kho, 15 (1917), 214 ff.) thinks that the period of composition 
runs from 28 B.c. to A.D. 6, but cf. Koepp, Sokrates, 8 (1920), 
289 ff. Kornemann’s views are elaborated in his Mausoleum u. 
Tatenbericht d. Augustus (1921). The extant copy comes from 
Ancyra. It was discovered, and part of the Latin portion copied, 
by Buysbecche in 1555. In 1746 Richard Pococke published a 
few fragments of the Greek text. More of it was copied by Hamil- 
ton in 1832. The copy on which present-day editions are based 
was made by Humann under the auspices of the Berlin Academy 
in 1882. The text with a full commentary was published by Momm- 
sen in 1865. A briefer commentary may be found in the editions 
of Peltier (1886), Fairley (1898), Cagnat, doc. cit., and Diehl (1918). 
The Latin text has been republished by R. Wirz (1922), and the 
entire text with commentary and English translation has been 
edited by E. G. Hardy (1923). 

The extracts which we have published from the Res gestae are 
of interest because of the light which they throw on the colonizing 
policy of the Romans under the early empire, on the provision 
made for veterans at the time of their discharge from the army, on 
the contributions offered to successful generals and to the emperor 
on special occasions by municipalities, and on the assistance given 
to needy cities in paying the vectzgalza. 


AMA Seeeied a2 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


In his statement Augustus does not include the colonies founded 
by his colleagues in the triumvirate, but mentions only those 
established by himself. On the foundations in Italy a passage in 
Hyginus (de /im. p. 177, ed. Lachmann) furnishes an important 
commentary: Divus Augustus, in adsignata orbi terrarum pace, 
exercitus, qui aut sub Antonio aut sub Lepido militaverant, pariter 
et suarum legionum milites colonos fecit, alios in Italia, alios in 
provinciis; quibusdam, deletis hostium civitatibus, novas urbes con- 
stituit; quosdam in veteribus oppidis deduxit et colonos nominavit; 
illas quoque urbes, quae deductae a regibus aut dictatoribus fuerant, 
quas bellorum civilium interventus exhauserat, dato iterum coloniae 
nomine, numero civium ampliavit, quasdam et finibus. 

In the case of Italian towns which had been hostile to him, he 
evidently followed somewhat the same policy which the Romans 
had adopted after the conquest of Sicily. Such places were turned 
over to the veterans and resettled by them. Other veterans were 
sent to established communities, which henceforth bore the title 
of colonies. Later in this record (chap. 28 = col. v, l. 36) Augustus 
can boast that twenty-eight of his Italian colonies were large and 
flourishing, and his boast is justified by the list of prosperous 
colonies in Italy bearing the title of Julia or of Augusta or both 
titles, such as Beneventum, Brixia, Minturnae, and Pisaurum. One 
might infer from chap. 16 (col. mm, |. 22) that the Italian and 
provincial settlements were both made in 30 B.c., but in fact the 
provincial settlements date from 14 B.c. The first sure case of a 
colony founded outside of Italy is that of Narbo Martius, settled 
in 118 B.c. (cf. p. 7), but this was a colony of civilians, whereas 
the ultramarine settlements of Augustus were military in character. 
In the last extract Augustus mentions ten different provinces in 
which he made these settlements, which in many cases served much 
the same purpose abroad as the Roman colonies had served in earlier 
days in pacifying and Romanizing Italy. This was the case especially 
with the military colonies planted in Galatia. ‘he payments made 
to provincial municipalities for the lands occupied by soldiers (ef. 
chap. 16 = col. m1, Il. 22 ff) would seem to be out of harmony 
with the legal theory that all the land in the provinces belonged 
to the Roman state (cf. p. 118). Whether this noteworthy pre- 


3380) 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


cedent set by Augustus was followed by later emperors we do not 
know. 

When Marius adopted the revolutionary policy of admitting the 
proletariat freely to the army, it was inevitable that some provision 
should be made for veterans at the end of their term of service. At 
first lands were assigned to them in colonies (cf. p. 7). Augustus, 
however, follows an alternative plan, not unlike the “adjusted 
compensation” proposal under discussion in the United States of 
America, of giving veterans either grants of land or money gratuities 
or both, as he did in 29 B.c. (cf. chap. 15 = col. 11, ll. 17 ff). The 
land-grant policy was given up after 14 B.c. (Cass. Dio, 54. 25), 
and from 7 B.c. a fixed money payment, probably of 12,000 sesterces, 
was made to each soldier on the completion of his term of service 
(Cass. Dio, 55. 23). To make these payments he spent 400,000,000 
sesterces before the close of his reign (cf. chap. 16 = col. 111, Il. 28 ff.). 
As the army became a more important factor in politics in the later 
years of the empire, great sums of money were given in the form 
of largesses to soldiers in active service, and this added heavily to 
the burden of taxes paid by the municipalities (cf. p. 219). 

The contributions made by the cities of a province to provide 
golden crowns to be carried in the triumphal procession of its 
governor are well enough known under the republic. Augustus 
checked the development of this practice in Italy (chap. 21 = col. rv, 
ll. 26 ff). 

As Mommsen has observed, chap. 18 (col. ur, ll. 40 ff.) is prob- 
ably to be interpreted in the light of Cassius Dio’s remark (54. 30) 
that: éresdy te 7) Acia TO éOvos émiKouptas Tivos bua cTEeLropovs 
pdr.ota édeito, Tov Te hopoy avTHs Tov éTevov ex TV éauTOD 
XENMATOV TO KoLV@™ eanveyKe. Specifically Augustus doubtless has 
in mind the remission of the vectiga/ia in the case of cities which had 
suffered from earthquakes or experienced some other serious loss. 
This interpretation would harmonize with von Premerstein’s emen- 
dation (Phil. Wochenschr. 1922, 135 ff.) of col. vi, l. 41 to read 
donata pecunia. . .colonis, municipits, oppidis terrae motu incendioque 
consumptis. The results of these generous acts of Augustus and of 
some of his successors are noted in another connection (cf. pp. 14.7 ff-). 


[330m 22-2 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


39. EDICTUM PROCONSULIS ASIAE DE MURO EPHESIO 
(ca. 11 p. Chr.) 


I.B.M. 521; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 7; Ditt. Syll.3 784. 

Mapxos ‘Epévv.os Uixns av6[vratos Neyer]. |’ Apavods yeyevy- 
pévov Tov ral[pateryia ||uatos, Strep Snwocias KatacKelune UTO 
tov ]| Edeciwy petak&d ths ayopas cali Tob ALpé]||vos yeyovevas 
cuvepoveito, e[ite év Tut] | TOV Kalpov 7 Tod Todewov Tre[pl- 
oTacet, ei ||Te dua THY TOUTMY apéreELar, ot TLeTaypEévoL | HoaV.... 

From Ephesus. This edict of the proconsul refers to a wall erected 
by the Ephesians for the convenience of exacting customs dues on 
goods entering the city by sea. Unfortunately the major portion 
of the inscription has disappeared, but, since the wall was built by 
the city, it might be inferred that the portorzum at Ephesus was a 
municipal, and not an imperial tax (Cagnat, Les zmpéts indirects chez 
les Romains, 4 ff.). The fact, however, that the wall had fallen into 
decay, and that the governor issued the edict concerning it, leaves 
the question of the control of this tax in uncertainty. The portorium 
at Palmyra was a municipal tax, but elsewhere it seems to have 
been imposed by the imperial authorities (cf. no. 89 and pp. 122 ff). 


40. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE AD CHIOS 
(5-14 p. Chr.) 


CIG. 2222; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 943; Ditt. Sy//.3 785. 


4 e / N \ brat d Hd > 

..| XtagpvrAou Urrapxovtwv pos Tovs Xeiwv mpécBets, ava- 
f > \ > of, 2S. A \ > n 
yewwo[Kor||tTwv ériotoAnyv “Avtectiov Ovétepos Tod Tpd éuod 

> / > \ > / la) a 
av@urrdt[ou], | avdpos émupavertatov, KataxoNovbayv 77 Kab- 
fal f a a \ e \ a \ 5) a 
onKh pov [7po]||Pélo lee rod [T]y[p]etv Ta v0 Tav mpd éwod 

> / ff / \ \ ec \ Z 

avOuTratwov ypadbévt[a, pul|NattTew Kal THY bTEép TovTwY depo- 
pévny ériatorny Ovéte[pos] | evroyov Hynoaunv: Uotepov Sé 
éxatépov pépovs €€ avtixalta]|otacews Tepi Tav Kata pépos 
Entnwatov év(T)vyéovTos Sin[Kouv]|ca Kal KaTa THY eurVy cUVN- 
Gevav Tap éxatépou pépous érripe|Aéa |||Tepa yeypaupéva rnoa 
vTopynpata’ [a NJaBav cal cata 76 émi[Bar]|rov éeriatHaas 
evpov Tots Mev Ypovo(s)s apyatotdrov Soypa[tos] | cuvKedAHTov 


Wee Key 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


avria[pplaysopa, yeyovotos Aovxiw YvrAArAq 7d Se[UTE]|pov 
UTatwl, €v @ paptul[pnO |etor Tots Xelous, doa trép “Popaiwv 
du[éOn || kav re Mc Opicdarnv avdpayabodbvres Kal Ur avTod érabov 
¢ / > a > / 4 / Nop sh 

n ovr[ Kr |||Tos efdtxds éBeBaiwoev OTrws vomots TE Kal EOeowy 
Kat dixators [ypov]|tas, a éoxov OTe TH Pwpaiwr (fr)AL@ Tpoc- 
al 7 € \ > ® fa) y 5 b) le BS 
MOov, wa Te vTO pnO wtivi[ody] | TUTM Bow apyovTwY 1 
avtapyovT@y, of Te Tap avTois dvtes ‘Pwlwai]|or tois Xetwy 
UTaKovwaoLy vopouss AvToKpaTopos Sé Oe0d viod S[e]| Bacrod ro 
oySoov UTdrou ériaToAH(Vv) mpds Xelovs ypagovt[os || . . us .ev 
THY TOA érrvOleTO .. | 


From Chios. This letter confirms the Chians in their privileges 
granted them by Sulla: the right of using their own laws, customs, 
and courts. Resident Romans were subjected to the jurisdiction of 
the Chian court. The latter concession is unusual, as Romans were 
usually tried by the governor under the principles of Roman law. 
Apparently some of the proconsuls had not observed the provisions 
of the decree of the senate passed under Sulla’s dictatorship, and 
the emperor Augustus and the present proconsul had been memo- 
rialized by the Chians who jealously guarded their privileges. This 
letter, therefore, furnishes evidence of the encroachment of the 
governors on the privileges which autonomous states enjoyed. It 
is true that the action of Antistius Vetus is apparently reversed, 
but it is evident that the governor is not instructed as to the varying 
status of the cities under his jurisdiction. His administration tends, 
accordingly, to be uniform in policy towards all the municipalities, 
until some of them choose to protest. In such cases they are required 
to furnish adequate proof for their claim to special treatment (cf. 
Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 47, 48, 92, 93). It is for this reason that 
cities, cherishing their ancient privileges, send embassies to the 
emperor on his inauguration asking for confirmation of their 
charters (cf. nos. 75, 130). For the autonomy of Chios see Livy, 
38. 39; Appian, AMithr. 25. 46; Pliny, N.H. 5. 136; Chapot, 
La prov. rom. proc. a’ Aste, 114, 125. 


[3344/2] 


15 


20 


Io 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


41, TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(ca. 14 p. Chr.) 


CIL. w1, 1741; Dessau, 938. 


P. Cornelio | Dolabellae cos. | vir viro epuloni, | sodali Titiensi, || 
leg. pro pr. divi Augusti | et Ti. Caesaris Augusti | civitates su- 
perioris | provinciae Hillyrici. 

Found at Ragusa in Dalmatia, on the probable site of Epidaurus. 
This is the only extant inscription concerning a concilium in Dal- 
matia. Dolabella was consul in a.p. 10 and /egatus from A.D. 14 


on (cf. Vell. 2. 125). 


42, TITULUS SEPULCHRALIS 
(p. 14 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 11, 5232; Dessau, 1977. 


C. Iulius Vepo donatus | civitate Romana viritim | et inmunitate 
ab divo Aug., | vivos fecit sibi et |] Boniatae Antoni fil. coniugi | 
et suls. 


Found at Celeia in Noricum. On the grant of Roman citizen- 
ship to individuals, cf. no. 13. For similar cases under the empire, 


cf. Dessau, 1978-1980. 


43. DECRETUM CENTUMVIRORUM 
(26 p. Chr.) 


CIL. x1, 3805; Dessau, 6579. 


Centumviri municipii Augusti Veientis | Romae in aedem 
Veneris Genetricis cum convenis|sent, placuit universis, dum de- 
cretum conscriberetur, | interim ex auctoritate omnium permitti || 
C. Iulio divi Augusti 1. Geloti, qui omni tempore | municip. Veios 
non solum consilio et gratia adiuverit | sed etiam inpensis suis et 
per filium suum celebrari | voluerit, honorem ei iustissimum de- 
cerni, ut | Augustalium numero habeatur aeque ac si eo || honore 
usus sit, liceatque ei omnibus spectaculis | municipio nostro bisellio 
proprio inter Augus|tales considere cenisque omnibus publicis | inter 
centumviros interesse, itemque placere | ne quod ab eo liberisque 
eius vectigal municipii || Augusti Veientis exigeretur. | 


[ 342 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Adfuerunt | C. Scaevius Curiatius, | L. Perperna Priscus rvir., | 
M. Flavius Rufus q., || T. Vettius Rufus q., | M. Tarquitius 20 
Saturnin., | L. Maecilius Scrupus, | L. Favonius Lucanus, | Cn. 
Octavius Sabinus, || I. Sempronius Gracchus, | P. Acuvius P. f. 25 
Tro., | C. Veianius Maximus, | T. Tarquitius Rufus, | C. Iulius 
Merula. || Actum | Gaetulico et Calvisio Sabino cos. 30 

Found at Veli. Only one other epigraphical case of the use of 
the title centumviri for the members of a municipal senate is known, 
viz. at Cures (CIL. 1x, p. 472). For the usual titles, cf. p. 56. For 
municipal decrees of the second and third centuries after Christ, 


cf. CIL. v, 532 and no. 146. 


44. TABULA PATRONATUS 
(27 p. Chr.) 

CIL. v, 4919; Dessau, 6100. 

M. Crasso Frugi, L. Calpurnio | Pisone cos. | 11 non. Febr. | 
civitas Themetra ex Africa hospitium || fecit cum C. Silio C. f. 5 
Fab. Aviola eum | liberos posterosque eius sibi liberis | posterisque 
suls patronum cooptave|runt. C. Silius C. f. Fab. Aviola civitatem 
Theme|trensem liberos posterosque eorum || sibi liberis posterisque 
suis in fidem | clientelamque suam recepit. | Egerunt Banno Himilis 
f., sufes; Azdrubal Baisillecis f., | Iddibal Bostharis f., leg. 

A bronze tablet found near Brixia, apparently kept in the villa 
of Silius Aviola. Other extant tablets record the election of Aviola 
in two other cities; cf. Dessau, 6099, 6099a. On the other hand 
a single city might have several patroni; cf. no. 136. On the 
election of priests in the colonia Genitivae Iuliae, cf no. 26. 
Azdrubal and Iddibal are deputies to announce his election to 


Aviola; cf. no. 135 and CIL. 1x, 3429. 


e 


O 


45. FASTI MAGISTRATUUM MUNICIPALIUM 
(p- 33 p- Chr.) 


CIL. x, 1233; Dessau, 6124. 


suf. A. Plautius, L. Nonius. 
T. Salvius Parianus, A. Terentius m1vir.; 
Sex. Aponius Proculus, O. Nolcennius aed. 


[esaean] 


Io 


“a5 


5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


L. Cassius Longinus, M. Vinicius cos., a. p. Chr. 30 
suf. C. Cassius Longinus, L. Naevius Surdinus. 


M. Sentius Rufus, QO. Vibiedius Sedatus rrvir.; 
P. Subidius Pollio, Sex. Parianus Serenus aed. 
Ti. Caesar Aug. Vv Cos. a. p. Chr. 3% 
suf. vir id. Mai. Faustus Cornelius Sulla, Sex. Teidius 
Catull. cos. 
suf. k. Iul. L. Fulcinius Trio cos. 


T. Oppius Proculus, M. Staius Flaccus rivir. iter. q.; 
M. Atinius Florens, A. Cluvius Celer aed. 
suf. k. Oct. P. Memmius Regulus cos. 
Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus cos. a. p. Chr. 32 
suf. k. Jul. A. Vitellius cos. 


M. Valerius Postumus, QO. Luceius Clemens rivir. ; 
C. Sentius Severus, L. Ippellius Atticus aed. 
Ser. ae Mant L. Sulla Felix cos. a. p. Chr. 33 


This Accutane contains che names fe the municipal magistrates 
at Nola from A.D. 29 to 33 inclusive. The inscription was probably 
cut subsequent to A.D. 33, because in that year Galba still retained 
the praenomen Lucius, which later he changed to Servius; cf. 
Prosop. 3, p. 284, no. 723. The appearance of the names of the 
magistrates of A.D. 31 after that of the consul suffectus named July 1, 
and before that of the suffectus named Oct. 1, probably points to 
July 1 as the date of election. This conforms to the practice in 
the col. Gen. lul.; cf. no. 26, |. 98. Not infrequently in the in- 
scriptions the names of the duovirs precede those of the consuls; 
cf., e.g., CIL. x, 1781. For a republican list of local magistrates, 
of. GL, ix, 422 = Dessau; 6122: 


46. LITES INTER CIERENSES ET METROPOLITANOS 
(11-35 p. Chr.) 


IG. 1x, 2, 261; de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico, 31; Tod, xx. 


rare diafé|pwrvtar mpds alAAyn]ras ovl[........] IH ai- 
Teiral, O7ws pel GpKov Kpudalilas....... Myr |porrorerrav 
Kpiwwovtwv, BpaBevor|[ros...... Tle wap vpety odirortos, Kad’ 


jv Kat tHS Kpta[ellos....]v nvéxOnoav pe? SpKov >Wwhdou 
[ 344 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Kuepsedo[e | Siaxdovas evevnxovta 6xt@, Myrpo|ronreirais tpia- 
KovTa pia, axvpo. weévte.|.... [Latwe Tlommjaiws YaBeiver 
mpeaBevtne TuBepiov Kaicap[os | 0 Seiva tod Setvos, ypaupa- 
Telvs tTav cuvédpwr TreioTa yaipew. “Eypal[Was jpiv rhv 
Keepréwy cat Mntlpororetév iaddeow Hv etyov Tepi Spor, 
6||[te adtay HElwoas Tovs auvédpou|s Kpivat ods Kat édndous LoL 
Kat Oru év Aide|[Wau: ewe 8 6d icOu edOds olxade a lvayaysvta 
mpobeivas thy Kkpiow év tae ével[ornxdts Meocarav TeV év 
Aalpion: cvvedpios tae év THe Odors pyri: cvverOovra[v | Sé 
Kal audhotépav ent TH lv kpiow Kal NOyov br’ aditav yevouévor, 
evnvel[yOar Tas ynpous xkpudaiws we] Spxov Kiepredowv pev 
Ovaxocias évevnxor[ra || d6xt@, Mnrpoonretitais 88 tTpudKovt la 
piav, axvpous tévte. Tadta émitndevov iyn|[odueOa yparrat. 
"Eppoco. Vatwr Uor]maias SaB8elvor mperBevthe TuBepiov 
Katcap[os | 0 Setva Tod Setvos, otpaty|yos Ocooadrav yaipew. 
"Eypawas xapoi Kal tolis | cuvédpous thv Kiepséwv re Kat 
M |ntporod tov brobeow, Hv eiyov Tept dpear, 6|[Te TO cuvédpLov 
THY TEept TOVTwY] Sidyvoai avéreuev. LeivwoKe ody cipn- 
L[é||vous tovs cuvédpous tovs év Tat OVlor pnvl Kat évynvey- 
févous pel Gpxov Kpudail[ws Tas wWihdhovs Kuepsedow] peév 
dtakootas évernxovtTa dxT@, Mntpl[o| tore tars Oé TpLaKOVTE pay, 
aKupous wélvte* TavTa ody émiTHdesov Hyno[d|weOa yoda, 
OTWS...-- Jov to BéBatov 1) Kpiows bro cov AaGBne ere]... . 
From Cierium. Gaius Poppaeus Sabinus was governor of Moesia 
from A.D. 11-35. In a.p. 15 the provinces of Achaea and Macedonia 
were added to his jurisdiction, being transferred from the senate 
to the emperor (Lac. 4un. 1. 80; 6. 39). In this document we 
have an example of administrative arbitration (cf. pp. 158 ff.). The 
dispute between the two cities was referred by the governor to the 
xowvov of Thessaly for decision. We learn that there were at least 
334 members in this assembly, each casting a single vote. It is not 
known whether the two cities Cierlum and Metropolis were per- 
mitted to vote in a case which affected them, but if not, we may 
assume that a larger number of votes could be cast at a full session 
of all the members. It is evident that some of the cities in Thessaly 
sent more than one delegate to the provincial assembly, as there 
could not be three hundred cities in this cowov. Cf. pp. 166 ff. 


[e345ia] 


IO 


15 


20 


Io 


T5 


20 


S) 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


47. IURIS IURANDI ARITIENSIUM IN 
PRINCIPEM FORMULA 
(37 p. Chr.) 


CIL. u, 172; Dessau, 190; Bruns, 101. 


C. Ummidio Durmio Quadrato, | leg(ato) C. Caesaris Germanici 
imp(eratoris) | pro pr(aetore). | 

Ius iurandum Aritiensium. || 

Ex mei animi sententia, ut ego iis inimicus | ero, quos C. Caesari 
Germanico inimicos esse | cognovero, et si quis periculum el! 
salutiq(ue) eius | infert inferetque armis bello internicivo | terra 
mariq(ue)persequi non desinam, quoad || poenas ei persolverit: 
neq(ue) me zeque liberos meos | elus salute cariores habebo, eosq(ue), 
qui in | eum hostili animo fuerint, mihi hostes esse | ducam: si 
sciens fallo fefellerove, tum me | liberosq(ue) meos Iuppiter optimus 
maximus ac || divus Augustus ceteriq(ue) omnes di immortales | 
expertem patria incolumitate fortunisque | omnibus faxint. 

A.d. v idus Maias in | Aritiense oppido veteri Cn. Acerronio | 
Proculo, C. Petronio Pontio Nigrino cos., || mag(istris) | Vegeto 
allict, <i, ibio;i:artont) 

Bronze tablet found at Aritium in Lusitania. It contains an 
oath taken by the residents of communities throughout the Roman 
world on receiving news of the accession of Gaius. A similar oath 
was taken by civilians when Tiberius became princeps (Tac. Ann. 
1. 7). Its general form was traditional; cf. Livy, 22. 53. The oath 
of allegiance which the people of Assos took to Gaius (no. 48) 
was preceded by a decree of the local senate and confirmed by the 
local Roman conventus. Among the /egati sent to Rome were four 
Greeks and one Roman. For an oath of allegiance to Augustus 


Dio B.C, ¢f./N0.4023 73 


48. DECRETUM ET IUSIURANDUM ASSIORUM 
(37 p. Chr.) 


Bruns, 102; Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 2513; Ditt. Sy//.3 797. 
"Ent vrratwv Vvaiov’Axeppawvior | IIpoxdou cai Tatov Movtiouv 
Iletpw|viov Nuypivov. | 
Vndiopa “Acciov yvopune Tod Sypou. || 
"Esret ) Kat evynv Taow avOperrots dria Oeica Taiov | Kai- 


[ 346 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


capos Teppavixod LeBacrod Hyewovia KatnvyeAtat, | ovdev dé 
Métpov yapas etpynx[elv 0 Kocpos, waca bé modus | Kal wav 
€Ovos emi tHv Tod Oeod driv ol ]evKer, ws av tod | HdicToU 
avOparrois aidvo[s| viv évertaros, || bofev TH BovdAH Kal Tois 
Tpaywatevopuevors trap nuiv | ‘Pwyatows cal tar Syuws ToL 
‘Accioy katactabhvar mpec|Belav éx TOV TPOTOY Kal apioTaDr 
‘Papatwyv te kai “EAXH|vov tHv évtevEopévny Kal cuvncOn- 
copévny atau, | SenOnoouevny te eye Sid ponuns Kal Knde- 
Kovias || THv ToL, KADws Kal avTOS META TOU TaTpOs 'epwavixod | 
ETLBAS TPOTWS THE eTrapKElat THs HueTépas Toews | UméayxeTO. | 
"Opxos ‘Accioy. | 

"Opvupev Aia Lwripa cat Oeov Kaicapa YeBacrov cal rnp || 
matpiov ayvnv Ilapbévor, evvoncev Vator Kaicapt SeBac|tae 
Kal TOL TUuTrAYTL OlKwWL aUTOD, Kal pirous Te KpiVety, | ods av 
autos Tpoaiphntat, Kal éyOpovs, ods av avTos mpoB8al|Anrau. 
evopkovaw pev piv ed ein, ebtopKodaw Sé Ta évar|ria. || 


IIpecBevral émnvyeinavto éx rév idiov: | Tdios Ovdpios 
Tatov vios OvorAtwia Kdoros| ‘Eppodavns Zwidov,| Kriros 
Ilictatparou, | Aioypiwv Kardudavous, || ~Apteuidwpos 


Piropovcor, | oftives Kat vTép THs Tatov Kaicapos YeBacrod 
Teppavixod | cwrnpias ev&duevos Aut Katritodios €Ovoav tas 
THS TONE|wS OvOpPAaTL. 

A bronze tablet found at Assos. It contains the oath taken by 
the city of Assos on the accession of Gaius. For similar oaths of 
loyalty, cf. nos. 37, 47. The excessive flattery in which the Greek 
cities indulged, when they sent their embassies to Rome, may be 
clearly seen in the tone of this decree. 


49. EDICTUM CLAUDI DE CIVITATE ANAUNORUM 
(46 p. Chr.) 

CIL. v, 5050; Dessau, 206; Bruns, 79; Girard, p. 188; Ricco- 
bono, p. 318; de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico, 39. 

M. Iunio Silano, Q. Sulpicio Camerino cos. | idibus Martis, 
Bais in praetorio, edictum | Ti. Claudi Caesaris Augusti Germanici 
propositum fuit id | quod infra scriptum est. || 

Ti. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus pont. | maxim., trib. 
potest. VI, imp. XI, p. p., cos. designatus m1, dicit: | 


[53470] 


T5 


20 


25 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


35 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Cum ex veteribus controversis pezdentibus aliquamdiu etiam | 
temporibus Ti. Caesaris patrui mei, ad quas ordinandas | Pinarium 
Apollinarem miserat,—quae tantum modo || inter Comenses essent 
(quantum memoria refero) et | Bergaleos,—isque primum apsentia 
pertinaci patrui mei, | deinde etiam Gai principatu, quod ab eo 
non exigebatur | referre, non stulte quidem, neglexserit; et posteac | 
detulerit Camurius Statutus ad me, agros plerosque || et saltus mei 
juris esse: in rem praesentem misi | Plantam Iulium amicum et 
comitem meum, qui | cum, adhibitis procuratoribus meis quzque 
in alia | regione quique in vicinia erant, summa cura inqui|sierit et 
cognoverit, cetera quidem, ut mihi demons||trata commentario facto 
ab ipso sunt, statuat pronun|tietque ipsi permitto. | 

Quod ad condicionem Anaunorum et Tulliassium et Sinduno|rum 
pertinet, quorum partem delator adtributam Triden|tinis, partem 
ne adtributam quidem arguisse dicitur, || tametsi animadverto non 
nimium firmam id genus homi|num habere civitatis Romanae 
originem: tamen, cum longa | usurpatione in possessionem elus 
fuisse dicatur et ita permix|tum cum ‘Tridentinis, ut diduci ab is 
sine gravi splendid# municipi | iniuria non possit, patior eos in eo 
lure, in quo esse se existima||verunt, permanere beneficio meo, eo 
quidem libentius, quod | plerzque ex eo genere hominum etiam 
militare in praetorio | meo dicuntur, quidam vero ordines quoque 
duxisse, | nonnulli allecti in decurias Romae res iudicare. | 

Quod benificium is ita tribuo, ut quaecunque tanquam || cives 
Romani gesserunt egeruntque, aut inter se aut cum | Tridentinis 
alisve, rata esse 1ubeam, nominaque ea, | quae habuerunt antea 
tanquam cives Romani, ita habere is permittam. 


Bronze tablet found in 1869 in the Val di Non, probably on the 
site of the principal village of the Anauni, near Trent (Tridentum), 
now in ‘Trent. The date is fixed by the opening paragraphs. This 
document takes the characteristic form of an edict (cf. pp. 236f,, and 
Haberleitner, Phz/ol. 68 (1909), 286 ff.). The introductory clauses 
close with the conventional phrase zmperator. . . dicit, and the verbs 
which follow are in the first person singular. Claudius used the 
form of the edict very freely for his constitutions (cf. Suet. Claud. 
16, uno die viginti edicta proposuit). 

Reference is made in the edict to two separate questions. One 


[ 348 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


question has arisen out of a dispute between Comum and the 
Bergalei. The other concerns the relations between Tridentum on 
the one hand and the Anauni (modern Non), the Tulliasses (Dolas), 
and the Sinduni (Saéne) on the other. The body of the edict 
(ll. 22 #f-) deals only with certain aspects of the second question. 
Why is the first incident mentioned at all? Its inclusion may be 
due to the well-known interest of Claudius in historical and anti- 
quarian matters, but mention of it here is justified in part, at least, 
by the historical connection between the two incidents, and by the 
fact that several of the legal questions arising were common to the 
two cases. In both instances the relation which certain Alpine 
tribes bore to a neighboring municipality was the fundamental 
point at issue. The historical connection arose from the circumstance 
that the facts in the case of Comum and the Bergalei had been 
investigated by Pinarius Apollinaris, a commissioner sent out by 
Tiberius, probably at the instance of Comum (cf. Hardy, Three 
Spanish Charters, 127, n. 9) and that the report of Apollinaris had 
remained in abeyance until Claudius took up the matter again and 
appointed a new representative in the person of Camurius Statutus, 
whose investigation brought to light certain puzzling legal and 
political questions in the relation which three other Alpine tribes 
bore to the municipium of ‘Tridentum. One matter involved in the 
case of the Anauni and the two other tribes concerns a claim to 
Roman citizenship. That can be decided only by the emperor, and 
to that question his edict (Il. 22 ff-) 1s devoted. Julius Planta, the 
commissioner of Claudius, is authorized to settle the other points, 
probably in the case of the Bergalei, as well as in that of the Anauni. 
It was the practice of the Roman people to put hamlets and people 
in the tribal state under the charge of the local magistrates of a 
neighboring czvitas (cf. pp. 10 ff-). “his practice had been followed 
in the Alpine region especially (cf. Hardy, op. czt. 130, n. 19; 
Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 7, 14), and the Anauni seem to have 
taken it for granted that as attribut: of Tridentum, they were 
citizens of ‘Tridentum, and, consequently, Roman citizens (ef. 
Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 4, 300), or that they were actually in the 
territorium of Tridentum, and for that reason were Roman citizens 
(cf. Hardy, op. cit. 124). In point of fact it transpires that none of 


[ 349 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


the Anauni are in the “territory” of Tridentum, that some of 
them are attributi and others have no connection with the muni- 
cipality (Il. 23, 24), and that even those who are attrzbuti do not 
have the full right of Tridentine citizenship (Mommsen, op. cit. 
4. 304 f.), and therefore are not Roman citizens. However, in view 
of the fact that they have honestly exercised these rights for a long 
time, and that the people of ‘Tridentum would be seriously in- 
convenienced by having their marriages with the Anauni declared 
illegal (cf Mommsen, of. cit. 4. 307), the emperor allows them to 
continue in the status which they believed was theirs. 

Tridentum is called a municipium in the edict (1. 28). With other 
‘Transpadane towns it received Roman citizenship from Caesar. 
Under the empire, but later than the time of Claudius, it was made 
a colony (cf. CIL. v, 5036). 

In the question which arose between Genua and the Viturii 
(cf. no. 10) only the two communities mentioned were involved. 
‘The ownership of certain land was vested either in the one com- 
munity or the other. ‘The case was a simple one of arbitration by 
the Roman senate through its commissioners between two com- 
munities. But here there are certain districts which, as Claudius 
says (1. 15), are mez zurzs. Such domains are subject to an impost, 
to be paid to the procurator (cf. Hirschfeld, 129 f.), and the state 
or the emperor is a party to the action. There are then three possi- 
bilities: (1) the Anauni may own the land in question; (2) they 
may be occupying land in the terrztorizum of ‘Tridentum. In this 
case they must pay tribute to Tridentum, or (3) their land may 
belong to Rome, in which case Rome has a claim on a part of the 
produce from it. Having settled the central question of citizenship, 
Claudius delegates the decision of the other points involved to his 
commissioner, Julius Planta, who is instructed to call into his 
consilium (cf. de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico, 350) the procurator 
of the neighboring province of Raetia and the procurators of the 
imperial domains near at hand (Il. 16-18). For commentario (l. 20), 
cf. Hirschfeld, 325, n. 1. The privilege which Claudius grants to 
the Anauni of retaining their Roman names (ll. 36, 37) would be 
implied in the gift of Roman citizenship. Perhaps the special 
mention of this matter reflects the fastidiousness of Claudius 


S59 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


on this point (cf. Suet. Claud. 25, peregrinae conditionis homines 
vetuit usurpare Romana nomina). 


50. ORATIO CLAUDI DE IURE HONORUM GALLIS DANDO 
(48 p. Chr.) 


CIL, x11, 1668; Dessau, 212; Bruns, 52; Riccobono, p. 228; 
Nipperdey’s Tacitus }°, 2, 317-322. 


see | mae rerum nostrarum situ.......... | Col. 1 

Equidem primam omnium illam cogitationem hominum quam | 
maxime primam occursuram mihi provideo, deprecor, ne | quasi 
novam istam rem introduci exhorrescatis, sed illa || potius cogitetis, 5 
quam multa in hac civitate novata sint, et | quidem statim ab origine 
urbis nostrae in quot formas | statusque res p(ublica) nostra diducta 
sit. | 

Quondam reges hanc tenuere urbem, nec tamen domesticis 
succes|soribus eam tradere contigit. Supervenere alieni et quidam 
exter|/ni, ut Numa Romulo successerit ex Sabinis veniens, vicinus 10 
qui|dem, sed tunc externus; ut Anco Marcio Priscus ‘T’arquinius. 
Is | propter temeratum sanguinem, quod patre Demaratho Co|rinthio 
natus erat et Tarquiniensi matre generosa sed inopi, | ut quae tali 
marito necesse habuerit succumbere, cum domi rel{pelleretur a 15 
gerendis honoribus, postquam Romam migravit, | regnum adeptus 
est. Huic quoque et filio nepotive eius (nam et | hoc inter auctores 
discrepat) insertus Servius Tullius, si nostros | sequimur, captiva 
natus Ocresia, si Tuscos, Caeli quondam Vilvennae sodalis fidelis- 
simus omnisque eius casus comes, post||quam varia fortuna exactus 20 
cum omnibus reliquis Caeliani | exercitus Etruria excessit, montem 
Caelium occupavit et a duce suo | Caelio ita appellitavzt, mutatoque 
nomine (nam TTusce Mastarna | ei nomen erat) ita appellatus est, 
ut dixi, et regnum summa cum rei | p(ublicae) utilitate optinuit. 
Deinde postquam Tarquini Superbi mores in||visi civitati nostrae 25 
esse Coeperunt, qua ipsius qua filiorum eius, | nempe pertaesum est 
mentes regni et ad consules, annuos magis|tratus, administratio rei 
p(ublicae) translata est. | 

Quid nunc commemorem dictaturae hoc ipso consulari impe|rium 
valentius repertum apud maiores nostros, quo in as||perioribus bellis 30 


Pyssaurl 


So 


40 


Col. 11 


IO 


15 


20 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


aut in civili motu difficiliore uterentur? | aut in auxilium plebis 
creatos tribunos plebei? quid a consu|libus ad decemviros translatum 
imperium, solutoque postea | decemvirali regno ad consules rusus 
reditum? quid in p/u|ris distributum consulare imperium tribunosque 
mil#um || consulari imperio appellatos, qui seni et saepe octonl 
crearen|tur? quid communicatos postremo cum plebe honores, non 
imperi | solum sed sacerdotiorum quoque? Iam si narrem bella, a 
quibus | coeperint maiores nostri, et quo processerimus, vereor ne 
nimio | insolentior esse videar et quaesisse iactationem gloriae 
pro|jlati imperi ultra oceanum. Sed illoc potius revertar. Civita- 
ter ite 
(nonnulla interciderunt) 


...potest. Sane | novo more et divus Augustus avonculus meus 
et patruus Ii. | Caesar omnem florem ubique coloniarum ac muni- 
cipiorum, bo|norum scilicet virorum et locupletium, in hac curia 
esse voluit. || Quid ergo? non Italicus senator provinciali potior 
est? Iam | vobis, cum hanc partem censurae meae adprobare coe- 
pero, quid | de ea re sentiam, rebus ostendam. Sed ne provinciales 
quidem, | si modo ornare curiam poterint, reiciendos puto. | 

Ornatissima ecce colonia valentissimaque Viennensium, quam || 
longo iam tempore senatores huic curiae confert! Ex qua colo|nia 
inter paucos equestris ordinis ornamentum L. Vestinum fa|miliaris- 
sime diligo et hodieque in rebus meis detineo, cuius liberi fruantur 
quaeso primo sacerdotiorum gradu, post modo cum | annis promo- 
turi dignitatis suae incrementa; ut dirum nomen la||tronis taceam, 
et odi illud palaestricum prodigium, quod ante in do|mum con- 
sulatum intulit, quam colonia sua solidum civitatis Roma|nae beni- 
ficium consecuta est. Idem de fratre eius possum dicere, | miserabili 
quidem indignissimoque hoc casu, ut vobis utilis | senator esse non 
possit. || — 

Tempus est iam, Ti. Caesar Germanice, detegere te patribus 
conscriptis, | quo tendat oratio tua; iam enim ad extremos fines 
Galliae Nar|bonensis venisti. | — 

‘Tot ecce insignes iuvenes, quot intueor, non magis sunt paeni- 
tendi | senatores, quam paenitet Persicum, nobilissimum virum, 
ami||cum meum, inter imagines maiorum suorum Allobrogici 
no|men legere. Quod si haec ita esse consentitis, quid ultra desi- 


[sant 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


dera|tis, quam ut vobis digito demonstrem, solum ipsum ultra fines | 
provinciae Narbonensis iam vobis senatores mittere, quando | ex 
Luguduno habere nos nostri ordinis viros non paenitet. || [imide 
quidem, p(atres) c(onscripti), egressus adsuetos familiaresque vobis 
pro|vinciarum terminos sum, sed destricte iam Comatae Galliae | 
causa agenda est, in qua si quis hoc intuetur, quod bello per de|cem 
annos exercuerunt divom Iulium, idem opponat centum | annorum 
immobilem fidem obsequiumque multis trepidis re||bus nostris plus 
quam expertum. Illi patri meo Druso Germaniam | subigenti 
tutam quiete sua securamque a tergo pacem praes|titerunt, et quidem 
cum @ census novo tum opere et inadsue|to Gallis ad bellum advo- 
catus esset; quod opus quam ar|duum sit nobis, nunc cum maxime, 
quamvis nihil ultra, quam || ut publice notae sint facultates nostrae, 
exquiratur, nimis | magno experimento cognoscimus. 


On a bronze tablet found at Lugudunum, now in the museum 
at Lyons. It is engraved in two columns. ‘The upper part of the 
tablet is lost. In the first column, which is not printed here, the 
emperor seeks to show by many illustrations that changes in 
political institutions have been frequent in Roman history, and that 
the Romans of early days were liberal in their treatment of foreigners, 
even taking some of their rulers from beyond the limits of the city. 
Lines 20-22 are commonly regarded as an apostrophe addressed 
by the emperor to himself. Mommsen regards them as verba... 
senatorum acclamantium et simul oratorem prolixum irridentium 
(E.E. 7, 394). A résumé of the speech of Claudius is given by 
Tacitus (Ann. 11. 24), and from this summary a few additions may 
be made to the speech as preserved on the tablet. The purpose of 
the emperor was to secure to the people of Gallia Comata the right 
to hold office in Rome and consequently to sit in the Roman senate 
(col. 11, 1. 31). They had been Roman citizens for many years (Tac. 
Ann. 11. 23), but under the Julio-Claudian emperors the grant of 
Roman citizenship to provincial cities does not seem to have carried 
with it of necessity the right to hold Roman magistracies (cf. 


30 


35 


40 


Mommsen, St. R. 1, 490 and nn.; zbid. 3, 876). The only Gallic | 


city outside Gallia Narbonensis having this fuller privilege was 
Lugudunum (col. 1, |. 29), which had been established as a colony 
in 43 B.c. It had been also especially favored by Claudius (cf. 


AMA [asenu 23 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Kornemann, R.E. 4, 529). The policy of admitting to the senate 
provincials having Roman citizenship seems to have begun with 
Julius Caesar (cf: Willems, Le sénat de la république rom. 1, 594 ff-) 
and is mentioned by several Latin writers (¢f. Suet. Caes. 76. 80; 
Bell. Afr. 28). It was continued by the triumvirs (cf. Willems, 
op. cit. 1, 613), and followed by Augustus and Tiberius (col. 11, 
ll. 1-2). Eligibility to the Roman senate was probably granted to 
the people of Vienna in Gallia Narbonensis by Gaius in 4.D. 39 
or 40 (cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 542) out of regard to his Viennese 
favorite Valerius Asiaticus, to whom Claudius refers in the words 
dirum nomen (col. u1, |. 14). On Valerius Asiaticus, cf. Tac. dun. 
11. 1-3, Prosop. 3, 352. The liberal policy of Claudius and his 
predecessors which tended to convert the Roman senate from an 
Italian into an imperial parliament was bitterly opposed in Rome 
(cf. Tac. Ann. 11. 23; Seneca, Apocol. 3). On the oratio principis, 
cf. pp. 234 ff. 

Tacitus tells us (4m. 11. 23) that the initiative in seeking zus 
adtpiscendorum in urbe honorum was sought by the primores Galliae, 
which leads Hirschfeld (K/ezne Schr. 132) to the interesting sug- 
gestion that the project originated in the Gallic conci/ium and that 
a formal request for the privileges here mentioned was transmitted 
to the emperor. There is an important article on this inscription 
by Grupe in Zeztschr. d. Savigny-Stift., Roman. Abteil. 42 (1921), 
31-413 cf. also Archiv, 6 (1920), 153 ff. 


§1. EDICTUM CLAUDI DE CURSU PUBLICO 
(49-50 p. Chr.) 

CIL. 111, 8. 1, 7251; Dessau, 214. 

Tz. Claudius Caesar Aug. | Germanicus pontif. max., | trib, 
potest. VIIII, imp. XVI, p.p., | dicit: || 

Cum et colonias et municipia non solum | Ita/ige, verum etiam 
provinciarum, item | civitatzum cuiusque provinciae lebare oneribus | 
vehiculorum praebendorum saepe temptavissem | et cum satis multa 
remedia invenisse mzhz viderer, || potuzt tamen nequitiae hominum 
non satis per ea Occurrit....... 


A marble tablet found at Tegea in Arcadia. The last part of 
[ 354 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


the inscription cannot be made out. Trib. potest. vit11 shows that 
the document falls between Jan. 25, A.D. 49 and Jan. 25, A.D. 50. 
On the conventional form of an edict, cf. pp. 236 ff; The purpose 
of the edict is to relieve municipalities in Italy and in the provinces 
from the burdens put on them by the imperial post. On the cursus 
publicus, cf. Seeck, R.E. 4, 1846-1863; Hirschfeld, 1g0-204. 
Under the republic no system had been organized for the carriage 
of either private or official letters, but Augustus stationed runners, 
and later vehicles, at convenient intervals along the military roads 
(Suet. Zug. 49). These wagons served for the carriage of despatches 
and government officials, This inscription makes it clear that the 
cost of this service fell on the towns through which the post passed, 
that the burden was heavy, and that many attempts had been made 
to remedy abuses. What measures Claudius proposed, we do not 
know. Evidently they were not effective. Complaints in Italy 
led Nerva to relieve towns in the peninsula from the expense 
(Hirschfeld, 191, n. 2). Of Hadrian we are told (Hist. 4ug. Hadr. 
7. 5)5 statum cursum fiscalem instituit, ne magistratus (sc. munictpales) 
hoc onere gravarentur. ‘Vhis reform would seem to have consisted 
in organizing the post under the fiscus, but towns were not relieved 
from meeting the expense of the service (cf. however, Seeck, R.E. 4, 
1848). Hadrian’s reform only meant that local magistrates were 
perhaps freed from the responsibility of providing teams and wagons. 
Septimius Severus was the first emperor to put the cost of main- 
taining the post on the fiscus (Hist. Aug. Sev. 14. 2), but it was soon 
transferred again to the czvitates (Seeck, R.E. 4, 1849), and was 
the source of endless complaint through the third and fourth cen- 
turies, as we may infer from the Digest and from the Codes of 
Theodosius and Justinian. ‘The cost included not only the furnishing 
of drivers, teams, vehicles, and fodder, but the maintenance of 
suitable manstones at regular intervals to serve as inns for official 
travelers. One of the noteworthy things in this edict is the fact 
that the central government, even in this early period, could not | 
always make effective its desire to right the wrongs done to the 
cities by its own officials. For the cursus publicus in the fourth 
century, cf. no. 156. 


[ 355 ] 23-2 


or 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


52. DECRETUM RHODIORUM 
(51 p. Chr.) 
Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1123; IG. xt, 1, 2, et corrigenda, p. 206. 


eT eis Be eile PE olyap ns. 8s Memoatols tl. oes ie eiee iaiee 
Tlv@wvos, “Apiotoyévns Ilaov, “Ap........ lewis wae Ao- 
you, Hetcapxos Terpacapxov, TloAvyappos [Pirovos], - ea 
. TH EVKTALOTATA EVNVEKTAL TAL TOAEL ATOKPLUATA....+--- || 
PAvri|ratpov cai Avovicvov ‘Apteutd@pov [spo |reretwax[e |v 
TAG[AS TAS TELUAS. 2.22.00. ,avopiav| tov | avabécess, dedox Pat 
Tat Bovrdt Kal Tat dapat, KUpwOEVTOS TobdEe Told adic |uaTos, 
[Ta dvopata avaypadjvat bro tHv | otplatayay él Bactos 
ALGouv AapTiou év THL Tepwéves TOV “ANiou vmép...|....0U Kal 
"Avtinatpov “Apteusdmpou cat Arovuciov ’Apteuddpov ...| 
yh yh otpatov, Kpatiday Dapvaxevs, "AreEwBpotidav Xpv- 
cimmov .||.. Aapaydpay 8’, Motpayévn Tesuodixov, Aapoyapwy 
DOD Vi diien s ote ahaa , [TlorA JU yappov Dirwvos, EvKrH “Ayn- 
adapyou, Ev@pen[tliday ........... , [arocra|vévtas roti] 
TiBépiov Kravdscov Kaicapa TepBavixov Avtoxpatopa...., 
[amro| S00eia jas Tat TOAEL TAS TATpLoV TroALTElaS Kal TOV VOMoV 
HiT OS ROE BREE ESO ay. [Né|pw]vos Kaicapos kai pwaptupnbévtar 
TOV avopev Tav ToT Tay TOAL evr[otay]........-.. 


‘This fragmentary inscription from Rhodes records the honors 
conferred upon the ambassadors sent to Rome at the time when the 
youthful Nero pleaded for the return of liberty to the Rhodians 
(Suet. Claud. 25; Nero, 7). 


53. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(P. 54 p- Chr.) 

Compt. rend. de Pacad. d. inscr. et bel. lettr. 1915, 3963 An. ép. 
1916, no. 42. 

M. Val(erio), Bostaris | f(ilio), Gal(eria tribu), Severo, | aedili, 
sufeti, 11vir(o), | flamini primo || in municipio suo, | praef(ecto) 
auxilior(um) adversus Aedemo|nem oppressum bello. | Huic ordo 
municipii Volub(ilitanorum), ob melrita erga rem pub(licam) et 
legatio||nem bene gestam, qua ab divo | Claudio civitatem Ro]|manam 


ro et conubium cum perelgrinis mulieribus immunitatem | annor(um) 
15 X incolas, bona civium bell|jlo interfectorum quorum here|des non 


[ 356 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


extabant suis impetra|vit. | Fabia Bira, Izeltae f(ilia), uxor, indul- 
ge|ntissimo viro, honore usa, impensam || remisit | et d(e) s(ua) 


p(ecunia) d(edit) d(e)dic(avit). 


Found at Volubilis in Mauretania Tingitana. It is subsequent 
to A.D. 54 because Claudius is called d:vus. Towards the end of 
the reign of Caligula the people of Mauretania Tingitana rose in 
revolt under Aedemon because of the murder of their king by the 
emperor; cf. Pliny, N.H. 5. 1. 11. This uprising was suppressed 
by Severus. It was probably in recognition of this service that 
Claudius granted to the people of Volubilis the favors recorded 
here. ‘he town is made a municipium with immunity from imperial 
taxation for ten years (cf. AZus. Belge, 28 (1924), 103 ff.). The 
citizens are given the right of intermarriage (conubium) with foreign 
women. Usually the right of conubzum was granted to peregrini, 
and it is probable that this provision merely recognized marriages 
already contracted between citizens of Volubilis and women of 
other towns in order that their children may have the status 
of Roman citizens. ‘The new municipality is given the property 
which had belonged to those of its citizens who had perished in the 
war and had died intestate. Ordinarily the estates of those who died 
without heirs and without leaving a will became imperial property 
(cf. Cuq, Fournal des savants, 1917, 481 ff.). The interpretation of 
incolas in line 14 1s uncertain. Most editors read zmco/is and assume 
that the benefits granted by Claudius were conferred upon aliens. 
De Sanctis (Revista di filologia, 53 (1925), 372 ff.), however, 
retains the form as it occurs on the stone, and advances the 
theory that aliens resident in Volubilis were subject to a tax (zn- 
tributio) which was now to be paid into the municipal treasury. 
For the zncolae attributi in a Roman colony he refers to the charter 
of Urso (no. 26, chap. 103) where Mommsen reads incolaeque 
attributiguve. The grant illustrates the Roman policy of encouraging 
the growth of the cities and of bringing indigenous peoples under 
Roman influence, as well as the generosity of Claudius in bestowing 
Roman citizenship. Severus had been sufes, duovir, and first flamen 
in Volubilis. As Cug has shown, the introduction of the cult of the 
emperor, and the consequent appointment of a flamen, follow 


eer 


iS) 


Oo 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


immediately on the erection of a municipium (op. cit. 497). Severus 
was probably sufes in the peregrine city, and became duovir and 
flamen when Volubilis was made a municipium. ‘The title sufes 
accords with the Punic name of the father and father-in-law of 
Severus. On the sufes, cf. Gsell, Histoire ancienne de Afrique du 
Nord, 2, 193 ff. For similar /egationes, cf. nos. 115, 126, and An. 
ép. 1916, no. 120. This inscription is also discussed in Comptes 
FEnAUS, TOIO\ SOL. 204 fy rg16y 2272 1501920," 320 281 ce 
Sanctis, Atti della reale accademia delle scienze di Torino, 53 (1918), 
453 ff-3 54(1919), 329 ff.; Weiss, Zectschr. d. Savigny-Stift., Roman. 
Abteil. 1921, 639 ff. Other inscriptions from Volubilis testify to 
the continued favor of the emperors, e.g. dn. ép. 1916, no. 100. 


54. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS NERONIS AD RHODIOS 
(55 p. Chr.) 

Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1124; Ditt. Sy//.3 810. 

[Em tep |éws A[soryé ]veus, rputaviov trav abv | Mevexde? TO 
"A[plyayopa, ypaupa[te|vovtos | BovrAds Netkactpayouv Ara- 
[dlavov, cal v(ofeciay dé) Apyedayl[ov, | a] émictova a arro- 
otadeioa vo Népwvos || Kravdiov Kaioapos Tetayertviou xf": | 
[Népwv] Kravd.os, Peod KXavdiov vids, TeBepiou Kaic[a]|pos 
SeBactod cal Veppavixod Kaicapos éyyovos, Oelod LeBactod 
améyovos, Kaicap X[eB]acros Tepparv|xos, dpytepevs, Snuap- 
xikns éEovcias, avtoxpa||twp, “Podiwr apxovot Boudry [67 ]uw 
xatpecy. | 

Oi mpécBes bar, ods ert TH Yrevdas érifa ]rorH | mpds buds 
Kopicbeion TO TOV UTAaT@V dvduaTe | TapayOévTeEs TPds ME 
émréurpare, Kal TO Wihdiopa [a]|rédocav Kai mept Tov Ovotdy 
édnrwcar as évere[t]||NacOe avtois Urép THs TavotKiou pov Uyeias 
kal | Ths év TH Hyeu[lolvia Siawovhs émirenéoat TO Kat’ é|Eoyny 
Tap nev Texwapevo Oe@ Art Katretorio, | wept t ov ereatan- 
KELTE AUTOS TpPOS THY THS TOAEWS | SnuoKpaTiav SiahepovTev 
évepavicav da K[Xav]||Séov Tetuwootpdrov tot apyimpec Bevtod, 
orou| aim rabet Tovs brrép Upwav em’ éwod Tromoapévar | Aoyous, 
avdpos Kau jot érl to Kpat[ilot@ da t[7 |v avavéw| ow TOv Tpos 
HuaS AUTO OiKalwy VrapxXovT@v yvepi|wou Kal Tap’ buety év Tots 
érrupavertatols KataptOmor[uél||vov. "Kyo obv ard Ths tmpeTns 
HALKiaS EVVOLKaS Tpos THY TO]|ALy Dudv Sila |Keiwevos.. 


ey 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


From Rhodes. This letter is included because of the reference 
to the restoration of liberty to the Rhodians by Claudius when 
Nero pleaded their case before the senate (Suet. Nero 7; Tac. Ann. 
12. 58). The Rhodians had, through internal dissensions or unwise 
alliances, suffered many changes in their relations to Rome. Tacitus 
says that their liberty had often been taken away or restored (/zbertas 
saepe adempta aut firmata). Cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. a’ Aste, 


119 f.3 no. 51. 


55. DE PRAEDIIS PUBLICIS GORTYNIORUM 
(64 p. Chr.) 

"Apyatoroyrxov Aevtiov, 2 (1916), 6. 

Ex auctoritate | Neronis Cludi (sic) | Caesaris Aug. Ger|manici 
pontif. || maxi., trib. pot. x1, | imp., cos 111, p.p. et | exs.c. | L. 
Turpilius Dexter | proc. praedia publica || Gortuniorwm pleraqule 
a privatis occupata | restituit termin|avitque. 

Found at Gortyn in Crete. The examination of the titles of 
Gortynian lands was authorized by the emperor in accordance with 
a decree of the senate. ‘This procedure was probably due to the fact 
that Gortyn was in a senatorial province. ‘T’he occupation of public 
lands by private citizens must have been of frequent occurrence, 
but this is the only inscription which bears directly upon the practice. 
The alienation of public lands was strictly forbidden in the charter 
of Urso (cf. no. 26, chap. 82). 


56. ORATIO IMPERATORIS NERONIS 
DE GRAECORUM LIBERTATE 
(67 p. Chr.) 

IG. vu, 2713; Ditt. Sy//.3 814. 

Avtoxpatop Kaicap déyer. Tis eis pe evvoilas te Kal evoe- 
Belas apeipacbar Oérov THY evye|veotdrny “EXAdda Kerevo 
mrelotous Kal” o[o]o[v] | evdeyerar é« tavTns Ths érapyxeias 
mapivat || is KopuvOov 77 mpo Tecodpwv Karavoav Ae|xeuBpior. | 

YuvenOovtav tav dyduv év ExkANala Tpocepo|vncev Ta Vrro- 
yeypappéva. | PRU AB 

Ampoadoxntov bev, dvdpes” EXAnves, Swpedy, || eb Kal undév 
Tapa THs éuns weyaroppoovrys | avédrictov xapifouar Tocav- 


[ee5ont 


Io 


Ll 


ie) 


15 


20 


25 


Io 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


THv Oonv ovk éywpy|cate aiteicOat* TavTes of THY Ayatlay Kat 
THv ws | viv TleXorévynoov Katocxodytes “EXXnves | AdBeTeE 
éhevOepiav, avirgopiayv, nv ovd év Tots evtul|yxectatos Uuav 
mdvtes ypovous éxxete* | 7) yap adXoTptous %) AAAHAOLS EdovAEU- 
cate. | Eide pev ody dxpalotons ths ‘EAXdSos traperyo| pny 
TauTny THY OwpEedy, iva wou TrEloves aTroAlavwot THS YapLTos: 
Ov 6 Kal péuhouat Tov aidva || tpodavavyicavTd pou TO péyedos 
THs yapitos: | Kal viv dé ov de’ éXeov buds, adda Oe evvoLaV 
evep|yeT@, apetBopas Sé Tods Oeods bua, dv Kal ia | ys Kai Ova 
Oardtrns ale “ov Tpovooup,évwy Tre|TEetpapuat, OTL Mot THALKAUTA 
evepyeTety Tapéoyor: || Toders ev yap Kal adroL HAEVOEpwaaV 
aryewoves, | [Népav dé povos cali érapyetar. 

From Acraephia (modern Karditza) in Greece. This document 
includes the edict of Caesar summoning the Greeks to Corinth, 
the proclamation which he issued there regarding the freedom of 
Greece, and a decree passed by the Acraephians (omitted here), 
dedicating an altar and offering sacrifices for the emperor. The 
senate was given the province of Sardinia to compensate for the 
loss of revenue derived from Greece, which was, by this proclamation, 
relieved from the payment of tribute. The prodigal gift of Nero was 
withdrawn by Vespasian (Pausanias, 7. 17. 2; Suet. Vesp. 8). The 
gratitude of the Acraephians was short-lived, for they carefully 
erased Nero’s name on the inscription after his death. 


57. DECRETUM PETRONI ET PUPI DE 
FINIBUS SAGALASSENSIUM 
(54-68 p. Chr.) 


de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico, 40; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 335; 
Ditt. Or. Gr. 538. 

"HE ervatonA[s] Oclod LeBao[r]od | Vepuarvi[xod Ka]icapos | 
Koivtos Uetperol|s OdpB(ep) mpecRevtns | Kat avtictparnyos 
Népo|[v]os KXavdiou Kaicapos | LeBacrod Teppavixod, | [cat] 
Ao[vxcjos Hovis Upat|lon[s éri|tpotos N[ép ]wvos | KrXalv- 
d|iov [K]atc[ap]os el[Bacr]od Te[p]uavexod | pobérncav 
Ta pev ev | de€vds etvar Layadraccéar, || Ta 5é ev apiotepas 
co|uns TupBpravacco[d..] | Népwvos KXavdiov Kaicapos | 
[XeBacrod VJepulavixod ....] 


[ 360 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


“The stone containing this inscription was so placed that the 
reader, looking north, had on his right hand, eastward, Sagalassian 
territory, and on his left hand, westward, the imperial estate named 
Tymbrianassus” (Ramsay, 4.7.4. 4 (1888), 267). The decision re- 
corded on this stone settled a boundary dispute between the city 
of Sagalassus and an imperial estate to which the village of Tym- 
brianassus belonged. On instructions issued by the emperor, the 
/egatus of the emperor in Galatia and the imperial procurator acted 
as arbiters. Sagalassus was once a civitas foederata (Marquardt, 
SH Verwo t75scpy @agnat, GRR) 2))250,) 252.4952)..bubiwas 
brought under Roman administration before the time of Strabo 
(Strabo, 12. 6. 5, p. 569). It is possible that her privileges had been 
abridged for the same reasons which had led to the change of status 
of the Rhodians (cf. no. 54). Petronius was /egatus of Galatia 
early in the reign of Nero (Prosop. 3, no. 238) and Pupius was 
procurator of that province in the reign of both Claudius and Nero 
(CIG. 3991, add. p. 1108). 


58. DECRETUM PROCONSULIS SARDINIAE DE FINIBUS 
PATULCENSIUM ET GALILLENSIUM 
(69 p. Chr.) 


CIL. x, 7852; Dessau, 5947; Bruns, 71a; Girard, p. 179; 
Riccobono, p. 256; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 5, 325 ff.; de Ruggiero, 
Lar bitrato pubblico, 43. 


Imp. Othone Caesare Aug. cos. xv k. Apriles | descriptum et 
recognitum ex codice ansato L. Helvi Agrippae procons(ulis), quem 
protulit Cn. Egnatius | Fuscus scriba quaestorius, in quo scriptum 
fuit it quod infra scriptum est tabula v c(apitibus) viir | et virir et x: 
ur idus Mart. L. Helvius Agrippa proco(n)s(ul) caussa cognita 
pronuntiavit: || cum pro utilitate publica rebus iudicatis stare con- 
veniat, et de caussa Patulcensi{um M. Iuventius Rixa vir ornatissi- 
mus procurator Aug. saepius pronuntiaverit, fijnes Patulcensium 
ita servandos esse, ut in tabula ahenea a M. Metello ordinati | 
essent, ultimoque pronuntiaverit, Galillenses frequenter retractantes 
controver|siam nec parentes decreto suo se castigare voluisse, sed 
respectu clementiae optumi || maximique principis contentum esse 
edicto admonere, ut quiescerent et rebus | iudicatis starent et intra 


[ion 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


k. Octobres primas de praedis Patulcensium recederent vacuam|que 
possessionem traderent; quodsi in contumacia perseverassent, se in 
auctores | seditionis severe animadversurum; et post ea Caecilius 
Simplex vir clarissi|mus, ex eadem caussa aditus a Galillensibus 
dicentibus: tabulam se ad eam rem || pertinentem ex tabulario prin- 
cipis adlaturos, pronuntiaverit, humanum esse | dilationem pro- 
bationi dari, et in k. Decembres trium mensum spatium dederit, 
in|tra quam diem nisi forma allata esset, se eam, quae in provincia 
esset, secuturum. | 

Ego quoque aditus a Galillensibus excusantibus, quod nondum 
forma allata esset, in | k. Februarias quae p(roximae) f(uerunt) 
spatium dederim, et moray illis possessoribus intellegam esse 1u- 
cun||dam: Galilenses ex finibus Patulcensitum Campanorum, quos 
per vim occupaverant, intra k. | Apriles primas decedant. Quodsi 
huic pronuntiationi non optemperaverint, sciant, | se longae con- 
tumaciae et iam saepe denuntiatae animadversioni obnoxios | futuros. 
In consilio fuerunt: M. Iulius Romulus leg. pro pr., T. Atilius 
Sabinus q. | pro pr., M. Stertinius Rufus f., Sex. Aelius Modestus, 
P. Lucretius Clemens, M. Domitius || Vitalis, M. Lusius Fidus, 
M. Stertinius Rufus. | Signatores: Cn. Pompei Ferocis. Aureli | 
Galli. M. Blossi Nepotis. C. Cordi Felicis. L. Vigelli Crispini. 
L. Valeri Fausti. M. Luta|ti Sabini. L. Coccei Genialis. L. Ploti 
Veri. D. Veturi Felicis. L. Valeri Pepli. 

On a bronze tablet found in 1866 in Sardinia. This is a decree 
of the proconsul L. Helvius Agrippa settling a dispute concerning 
land of two peoples of Sardinia. The quarrel had lasted from 114 B.c. 
to A.D. 69. Four steps in the adjudication of the matter are recorded 
in the document: the decisions, (1) of the proconsul Metellus in 
114 B.C. (l. 7), (2) of M. Iuventius Rixa, procurator in a.p. 66-67 
(ll. 12 f-), (3) of the proconsul Caecilius Simplex (ll. 13 ff:), and (4) of 
the proconsul L. Helvius Agrippa (ll. 20 ff). Metellus had awarded 
the lands in dispute to the Patulcenses, but the Galillenses continued 
to hold them by force (1. 20). Rixa confirmed the decision of 
Metellus and ordered the Galillenses to vacate the territory in 
question before a fixed date, or to be adjudged auctores seditionis 
(ll. 12 f.). Simplex granted a delay of two months, from October 1 
to December 1, in order that the Galillenses might obtain a copy 


[ 362 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


of the decree of Metellus from the tabularium principis. Agrippa 
continued the respite for two months more, but since the Galillenses 
did not submit the forma from Rome, he issued this decree, in 
accordance with the forma in the province, on Mar. 13 (1. 4), 
and a copy of it was furnished on Mar. 18 (1. 1) by Cn. Egnatius 
Fuscus, the scriba quaestorius of the provincial governor (Mommsen, 
St. R. 1, 348, n. 23 349, n. 2), to the Patulcenses, who had it 
inscribed on this tablet. Sardinia was in charge of imperial procura- 
tors up to A.D. 67, when it was turned over to the senate (Pausanias, 
7- 17. 3). Rixa, probably the last procurator, was succeeded by the 
proconsul Simplex, whom Agrippa followed. Mommsen is of the 
opinion that a governor did not have the power to settle a question 
like this one in Sardinia, but that it had to be referred to the em- 
peror. However that may be, petitions seem to have been sent to 
the emperor, and probably the delay granted by Rixa was made at 
the suggestion of the emperor (ll. 8 /f:). Strangely enough the copy 
of the decree of Metellus in the tabularium principis is to be secured 
by the Galillenses, not by the governor. Agrippa has eight men in 
his constlium (ll. 23 ff.). At the head of the list stand his /egatus pro 
praetore and his guaestor pro praetore. ‘The copy is in tablet v, 
chapp. vitI—x, in the codex ansatus of Agrippa, which is produced 
for the purpose of making the copy by his scrzba guaestorzus (ll. 2 ff). 
It is signed by eleven witnesses (ll. 25 ff), whose names stand in 
the genitive on the bronze tablet, because on the copy they were 
probably preceded by seals. In ll. 8-9 the engraver should have cut 
controversiam and in |. 19 moram. Outside of the literature cited 
in the heading, cf. also Karlowa, 1, 818 ff. On the decreta, cf. 
p. 239, n. 4. On arbitration, cf. pp. 152 ff. 


59. RESCRIPTUM VESPASIANI AD VANACINOS 
(ca. 72 p. Chr.) 

CIL. x, 8038; Bruns, 80; Girard, p. 190; Riccobono, p. 320. 

Imp. Caesar Vespasianus Augustus | magistratibus et senatoribus | 
Vanacinorum salutem dicit. | Otacilium Sagittam, amicum et 
procu||ratorem meum, ita vobis praefuisse, | ut testimonium vestrum 5 
mereretur, | delector. | De controversia finium, quam ha|betis cum 
Marianis, pendenti ex || is agris, quos a procuratore meo | Publilio 10 


3630] 


15 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Memoriale emistis, ut | finiret Claudius Clemens procu|rator meus, 
scripsi ei et mensorem | misi. || Beneficia tributa vobis ab divo | 
Augusto post septimum consula|tum, quae in tempora Galbae re- 
ti|nuistis, confirmo. | Egerunt legati || Lasemo Leucani f. sacerd(0s) 
Aug(usti), | Eunus Tomasi f. sacerd(os) Augusti, | C. Arruntio 
Catellio Celere, M. | Arruntio Aquila cos. 1111 idus Octobr. | 


A bronze tablet found in Corsica. The letter of the emperor 
not only provided for the settlement of a territorial dispute with 
the colonia Mariana (cf. Abbott, Class. Phil. 10 (1915), 374), but 
it also confirmed certain privileges granted by Augustus, which had 
been allowed to lapse in the time of Galba. On the settlement of 
territorial disputes, cf. pp. 154 ff. On the form of a rescript, cf. 
pp. 237 ff 


60. TITULUS SACER 
(76 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 1, 1610; Dessau, 1981. 


Apollini Aug. | municipes Igabrenses | beneficio imp. Caesaris 
Aug. Vespasiani | c. R. c. cum suis per hozorem || Vespasiano vr 


cos., M. Aelius M. fil. Niger aed. | d. d. 


Found on the site of Igabrum in Baetica. Vespasian showed 
special favor to Spain, perhaps because of its early adherence to 
his cause; cf. Tac. Hist. 2. 67, 86, 97; 3. 44. Probably in 74 he 
conferred Latium minus on it. To certain individuals and to certain 
communities he granted Roman citizenship; cf. Weynand, R.E. 
6, 2659 f., 2661, 2681. Furthermore, in the inscriptions there 
are ninety cases in which the names of Spanish towns, the enrolment 
of their citizens in the Flavian tribe, Quirina, or the application 
of the epithet municipium Flavium probably indicate a remodelling 
by Vespasian; cf. McElderry, ‘fourn. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 68, 
78. Altogether under Vespasian at least four hundred communities 
received new charters; cf. McElderry, /oc. cit. 78. On Vespasian’s 
grant to the Saborenses, cf. no. 61. His liberal policy in Spain was 
followed by Domitian, who granted charters to several cities; cf. 
nos. 64,65. C. R. c. in our inscription is an abbreviation of civitatem 
Romanam consecutt. 


[ 364 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


61. EPISTULA VESPASIANI AD SABORENSES 
(78 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 1, 1423; Dessau, 6092; Bruns, 81; Girard, p. 190; 
Riccobono, p. 320. 


Imp. Caes. Vespasianus Aug. pon|tifex maximus, tribuniciae | 
potestatis vi11I, imp. x1rx, consul | vu, p. p., salutem dicit mur 
viris et || decurionibus Saborensium. | Cum multis difficultatibus 
infirmita|tem vestram premi indicetis, per|mitto vobis oppidum sub 
nomine meo, ut | voltis, in planum extruere. Vecti||galia, quae ab 
divo Aug. accepisse dici|tis, custodio; si qua nova adicere volltis, 
de his procos. adire debebitis, ego | enim nullo respondente constitu|- 
ere nil possum. Decretum vestrum || accepi vir ka/, August. 
Legatos dimi|si mr ka/. easdem. Valete. | IIviri C. Cornelius 
Severus et M. Septimilus Severus publica pecunia in aere | inci- 
derunt. 


Bronze tablet found at Cafiete in Baetica, Spain, in the sixteenth 
century, and now lost. The titles fix the date as in the latter half 
of a.p. 78. Vespasian permits the Saborenses to rebuild their town 
on a new site in the plain, with the title Flavia. The inscription is 
important as attesting imperial control over municipal taxation, and 
as showing the procedure which a town of this class must follow 
before laying new taxes. “he central government required munici- 
palities to submit to it their plans for new imposts, for fear its own 
sources of revenue would be diminished by local taxation. Whether 
the vectigalia referred to here took the form of an octroi, as at 
Palmyra (cf. no. 89; p. 140, n. 2; Dessau, Hermes, 19 (1884), 
486—5 33), or not, it is impossible to say (cf. Liebenam, Sz. Verw. 
22; Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 157, n. 5). To Stratonicea, a newly- 
founded city, Hadrian even turned over a tax which had previously 
been paid to the fiscus (cf. no. 83). The title Flavia follows about 
four years after the granting of Latin rights to all towns in Spain 
(cf. Plin. N.H. 3. 3. 30). On Vespasian’s reconstruction of Spain, 
cf. no. 60. 


[ 365 ] 


5 


5 


Io 


15 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


62. LEX DE OFFICIIS ET HONORIBUS FLAMINIS 
PROVINCIAE NARBONENSIS 
(69-79 p. Chr.) 


CIL. x11, 6038; Dessau, 6964; Riccobono, p. 159; Bruns, 29; 
Carette, Les assemblées prov. de la Gaule rom. 445 ff. 


Bee eas Ls oak Narbone..............flamen | cum rem divinam 
faciet sacrificabitque, lictores gut magistratibus apparent, et apparento.| 
Micg es: Sern tae secundum legem iusque elus provinciae............ 
sr. s (ilshen tee ..ei in decurionibus senatuve sententiae dicendae 
SEEMAMAIGUC AG RELI lI hip e)e pyle teeta inter decuriones senatoresve sub- 
sellio primo spectand: /udos publicos tus potestasque esto. | ........- 
uxor Ha veste alba aut purpurea vestita festis diebus........ 
pedi ees .neve invita lurato neve corpus hominis mortuz 
attingito neve if FTC steiatt hapa ats nist necessarii hominis erit eique 
spectaculis publicis elus provinciae loco... .interesse liceto. | 

De honoribus eius qui flamen fuerzt. || Sz que flamen fuerit adversus 
hanc legem nihil fecerit, tum is qui flamen erit cum primum poterit 
ad legatos provinciae referto | ugque per tabellas iurati decernant, 
placeatne ei qui flamonio abierit permitti statuam szbi ponere. Cui 
ita decreverint | tus esse statuae ponendae nomenque suum patrisque 
et unde sit et quo anno flamen fuerit inscribendt, et | Narbone intra 
fines eius templi statuae ponendae ius esto, nisi cul imperator Caesar 
Augustus interdixerit (?). Ezdem | in curia sua et concilio provinciae 
Narbonesis inter sui ordinis secundum legem...... || sententiae 
dicendae signandique ius esto, item spectaculo publico in provincia 
edendo inter decurtones interesse prae|textato eisque diebus, quibus, 
cum flamen esset, sacrificium fecerit, ea veste pud/ice uti, qua in 
eo faciendo usus est. | 

Si flamen in civitate esse deszerit. | Si flamen in civitate esse 
desierit, neque ei subrogatus erit, tum uti quisgue....... | in 
triduo quo certior factus erit et poterit, Narbone sacra facito omniaque 
secundum hanc legem per reliquam || partem eius anni eo ordine 
habeto, quo annuorum flaminum habentur, eique st ea fecerit per 
dies non minus | Xxx, siremps lex ius causaque esto, quae flamini 
Augustalt ex hac lege facto erit. | 

Quo loco concilium provinciae habendum sit. | Qui in concilium 


[ 366 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


provinciae convenerint Narbonem, 1bi td habento. Si quid extra 
Narbonem finesve Narbone|sium concilio habito actum erit, id ius 
ratumque ne esto (*) || 

De pecunia sacris destinata. | Qui flamonio abierit, is ex ea pe- 
cunia guae sacris destinata erit, quod eius superfuerit, statu|as 
imaginesve imperatoris Caesaris dugusti....... arbitratu(?) eius qut 
eo anno pro|vinciae praeerit intra idem templum dedicato...... 
segue omnia sicut hac lege cautum est de | ea re, fecisse apud eum qul 
rationes provinciae putabit...... probato.||..... temple gavsse : 

Bronze tablet found in 1888 at Narbonne, now in the Louvre. 
The upper left hand and the lower right hand corners are lost; see 
facsimile in Carette, op. cét#. 445. Perhaps the inscription belongs 
to the reign of Vespasian; cf. Krascheninnikof, Philol. 53 (1894), 
161 ff. Of most interest to one who is studying the concz/za are the 
paragraphs beginning de honoribus eius and quo loco concilium. From 
the first paragraph it is clear that the conci/ium meets under the 
presidency of the flamen, who takes the initiative in laying the 
business of the meeting before the /egatz, or representatives of the 
several cities. In this important matter they vote by secret ballot, 
as the senators at Urso and Malaca did in similar circumstances 
(cf. nos. 26 and 64), and under oath. Probably on ordinary matters 
an oral vote was taken, without an oath. From the fact that the 
right of the emperor to interpose a veto in this case is set forth in 
the law, we may infer with probability that he rarely intervened 
(cf. no. 97). From the paragraph beginning guo loco concilium it 
seems highly probable that the assembly met in the temple of Rome 
and Augustus, remains of which have been found at Narbonne, 
and, if Mommsen’s restoration at the end of this paragraph is 
correct, the concilum, like the Roman senate, could not legally 
meet outside the limits of the city. 


63. EPISTULA DOMITIANI AD FALERIENSES 
(82 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 1x, 5420; Bruns, 82; Girard, p. 191; Riccobono, p. 321. 
Imp. Caesar divi Vespasiani f. | Domitianus Augustus | pontifex 


max., trib. potest., imp. 11, | cos. vu designat. vu, p. p., salutem 
dicit || 1111 viris et decurionibus Faleriensium ex Piceno. | 


[3074 


25 


30 


Io 


5 


20 


25 


30 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Quid constituerim de subsicivis cognita causa | inter vos et 
Firmanos, ut notum haberetis, | huic epistulae subici tussi. | 

BeiValerio Patruino. fis oe cos. || xmr k. Augustas. | 

Imp. Caesar divi Vespasiani f. Domitianus | Aug. adhibitis 
utriusque ordinis splen|didis viris cognita causa inter Fale|rienses 
et Firmanos pronuntiavi quod |] suscriptum est. | 

Et vetustas litis, quae post tot annos | retractatur a Firmanis 
adversus | Falerienses, vehementer me movet, | cum possessorum 
securitati vel mi||nus multi anni sufficere possint, | et divi August, 
diligentissimi et in|dulgentissimi erga quartanos suos | principis, 
epistula, qua admonuit | eos, ut omnia subpsiciva sua collige||rent 
et venderent, quos tam salubri | admonitioni paruisse non dubito; | 
propter quae possessorum ius confirmo. | Valete. 

D(atum) x1 k. Aug. in Albano, | agente curam T. Bovio Vero, || 
legatis P. Bovio Sabino, | P. Petronio Achille-—Dvecreto) d(ecurio- 
num) p(ublice). 


Bronze tablet found at Falerio in Picenum in 1595, now lost. 
Domitian’s name in ll. 2 and 11 and that of the second consul in 
l. g have been cut off. The phrase adhibitis utriusque ordinis splen- 
didis viris (ll. 12-13) implies that the constlium, or, as it was later 
called, the conststorium of the emperor was composed of both senators 
and knights, but that its composition had not become fixed, as it 
did under Hadrian (cf. Herzog, 2, 369 ff, 757 3 Mommsen, St. R. 
250088) 7725 \Hurschtfelds)240,n.)2; oceck nats, O27) fas oud, 
Mém. sur le consilium principis). ‘The letter settles the ownership 
of small parcels of land in the possession of Firmum, but claimed 
by Falerio. On the division of village lands, cf. Liebenam, St. Verw. 
1-13. This inscription makes it highly probable that Falerio was 
a colony of veterans founded by Augustus (ll. 22 ff; cf. Mommsen, 
Hermes, 18 (1883), 173; CIL. 1x, p. 517). For the method of 
procedure before the emperor’s consilium, cf. pp. 241 ff. For the 
concluding paragraph, cf. p. 238. For other cases of arbitration, cf. 


nos. 8, 10, 46, 57, 58, 59, 104, and pp. 152 ff. 


[ 368 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


64. LEX SALPENSA 
(81-84 p. Chr.) 


CIL. u, 1963; Dessau, 6088; Bruns, 30¢; Girard, p. 108; 
Riccobono, p. 162. 


R(ubrica). Vt magistratus civitatem Romanam consequantur. 


XXI...Qut uvir aedilis quaestor ex hac lege factus erit, cives 
Romani sunto, cum post annum magistratu | abierint, cum parentibus 
coniugibusque ac liberis, qui legitumis nuptis quae|siti in potestatem 
parentium fuerznt, item nepotibus ac neptibus filio | nates xatabus, 
qui quaeque in potestate parentium fuerint; dum ne plures c(ives) 
Romani) | sint, quam quod ex h(ac) l(ege) magistratus creare 
oportet. || 


R. Vt qui civitat(em) Roman(am) consequantur, maneant 
in eorundem m(ancipio) m(anu) | potestate. | 


XXII. Qui quaeve ex h. |. exve edicto imp(eratoris) Caesaris 
Aug(usti) Vespasiani, imp(eratoris)ve Titi | Caesaris Aug(usti), aut 
imp(eratoris) Caesaris Aug(usti) Domitiani p(atris) p(atriae), civi- 
tatem Roman(am) | consecutus consecuta erit: is ea in eius, qui 
c(ivis) R(omanus) h(ac) l(ege) factus erit, potestate || manu mancipio, 
cuius esse deberet, si civitate Romana mutatus | mutata non esset, 
esto idque ius tutoris optandi habeto, quod | haberet, si a cive Ro- 
mano ortus orta neq(ue) Civitate mutatus mu|tata esset. 


R. Vt qui c(ivitatem) R(omanam) consequentur, iura 
libertorum retineant. | 


XXIII. Qui quaeve ex h(ac) I(ege) exve edicto imp(eratoris) 
Caes(aris) Vesp(asiani) Aug(usti), imp(eratoris)ve Titi Caes(aris) 
Vespasian(i) Au(gusti), || aut imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) Domitiani 
Aug(usti), c(ivitatem) R(omanam) consecutus consecuta erit: is in | 
libertos libertasve suos suas paternos paternas, qui quae in C(ivitatem) 
R(omanam) non | venerit, deque bonis eorum earum et is, quae 
libertatis causa inposita | sunt, idem ius eademque condicio esto, 
quae esset, si Civitate mutatws | mutata non esset. 


AMA [ 369 ] 24 


Col. 1 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


R. De praefecto imp(eratoris) Caesaris Domitiani Aug- 
(ust). || 
XXIIII. Si eius municipi decuriones conscriptive municipesve 
imp(eratori) Caesar? Domitian(o) | Aug(usto) p(atri) p(atriae) 
ilviratum communi nomine municipum eius municipi de|tulerznt 
imp(erator)gue Domitianus Caesar Aug(ustus) p(ater) p(atriae) eum 
Irviratum receperit | et loco suo praefectum quem esse iusserit: 1s 
praefectus eo zure esto, quo | esset si eum I1vir(um) i(ure) d(icundo) 
ex h(ac) I(ege) solum creari oportuisset, isque ex h(ac) l(ege) solus || 
I1vir i(ure) d(icundo) creatus esset. 








R. De iure praef(ecti), qui a 11vir(o) relictus sit. 


XXV. Ex rviris qui in eo municipio i(ure) d(icundo) p(rae- 
erunt), uter postea ex eo municipio proficiscetur | neque eo die in 
id municipzum esse se rediturum arbitrabitur, quem | praefectum 
municipi non minorem quam annorum xxxv ex | decurionibus 
conscriptisque relinquere volet, facito ut is iuret per || Iovem et 
divom Aug(ustum) et divom Claudium et divom Vesp(asianum) 
Aug(ustum) et divom | Titum Aug(ustum) et Genium imp(era- 
toris) Caesaris Domitiani Aug(usti) deosque Penates; | quae 
Ilvir(um), qui i(ure) d(icundo) p(raeest), h(ac) l(ege) facere oporteat, 
se, dum praefectus erit, d(um) f(axat) quae eo | tempore fier! possint 
facturum, neque adversus ea facturum scientem | d(olo) m(alo); 
et Cum ita iuraverit, praefectum eum eius municipi relinquito. £i || 
qui ita praefectus relictus erit, donec in id municipium alteruter 
ex Ilviris | adierit, in omnibus rebus id ius eaque potestas esto, prae- 
terquam de praefec|to relinquendo et de c(ivitate) R(omana) con- 
sequenda, quod ius quaeque potestas h(ac) l(ege) | tviris guz iure 
dicundo praeerunt datur. Isque dum praefectus erit quo|tiensque 
municipium egressus erit, ne plus quam singulis diebus abesto. || 


R, De ture turando t1vir(um) et aedil(ium) et q(uaes- 
torum). | 
XXVI. Duovir(i) qui in eo municipio (ure) d(icundo) p(rae- 
sunt), item aediles guz in eo municipio sunt, item | quaestores qui 
in eo muncipio sunt, eorum quisque in diebus quinq(ue) | proxumis 
post h(anc) l(egem) datam; quique 11vir(i) aediles quaestoresve postea 


[37° J 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


ex h(ac) l(ege) | creati erunt, eorum quisque in diebus quinque 
proxumis, ex quo livir || aedilzs quaestor esse coeperit, priusquam 
decuriones conscriptive | habeantur, iuranto pro contione per lovem 
et divom Aug(ustum) et divom Claudi|um et divom Vespasianum 
Aug(ustum) et divom Titum Aug(ustum) et Genium Domitiani | 
Aug(usti) deosque Penates: se, quodquomque ex h(ac) I(ege) exque 
re communi m(unicipum) m(unicipi) Flavi | Salpensani censeat, 
recte esse facturum, negue adversus h(anc) l(egem) remve com- 
mu||ne municipum eius municipi facturum scientem d(olo) m(alo), 
quosque prohi|bere possit prohibiturum; neque se aliter consilium 
habiturum neq(ue) aliter | daturum neque sententiam dicturum, 
quam uf ex h(ac) l(ege) exque re communi | municipum eius muni- 
cipi censeat fore. Qui ita non iuraverit, is Hs x (milia) | municipibus 
elus municipi d(are) d(amnas) esto, eiusque pecuniae deque ea 
pecunia mu||nicipum eius municipi cui volet, cuique per hanc legem 
licebit, actio peti|tio persecutio esto. 


R. De intercessione rvir(um) et aedil(ium) et q(uaes- 
torum). | 


XXVII. Qui rivir(i) aut aediles aut quaestores elus municipi 
erunt, his rvir(is) inter | se et cum aliquis alterutrum eorum aut 
utrumque ab aedile aedilibus | aut quaestore quaestoribus appellabit, 
item aedilibus inter se, ztem quaestoribus inter se inter||cedendi, in 
triduo proxumo quam appellatio facta erit poteritque | intercedi, 
quod eius adversus h(anc) l(egem) non fiat, et dum ne amplius 
quam semel | quisque eorum in eadem re appelletur, ius potestasque 
esto, neve quis | adversus ea quid, quem intercessum erit, facito. | 


R. De servis apud 11vir(um) manumittendis. || 

XXVIII. Si quis municeps municipi Flavi Salpensani, qui 
Latinus erit, aput 11vir(os), | qui lure dicundo praeerunt elus muni- 
cipi, servom suom servamve suam | ex servitute in libertatem manu- 
miserit, liberum liberamve esse iusserit, | dum ne quis pupillus neve 
quae virgo mulierve sine tutore auctore | quem quamve manu- 
mittat, liberum liberamve esse iubeat: qui ita || manumissus liberve 
esse lussus erit, liber esto, quaeque ita manumissa | liberave esse 
iussa erit, libera esto, uti qui optumo iure Latini libertini liberi 
sunt erunt; dum is qui minor xx annorum erit ita manumittat, | 


[ 371 |] 24-2 


45 
Col. 1 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


si Causam manumittendi iustam esse is numerus decurionum, per 
quem | decreta h(ac) l(ege) facta rata sunt, censuerit. 


-R. De tutorum datione. || 


30 


X XIX. Cui tutor non erit incertusve erit, si is eave municeps 
municipi Flavi Salpensani | erit, et pupilli pupillaeve non erunt, 
et ab riviris, qui i(ure) d(icundo) p(raeerunt) eius municipi, postu-| 
laverit, uti sibi tutorem det, ef eum, quem dare volet, nominaverit: 


_ tum is, | a quo postulatum erit, sive unum sive plures collegas 


35 


40 


habebit, de omnium colle|garum sententia, qui tum in eo municipio 
intrave fines municipi eius erunt, || causa cognita, si ei videbitur, 
eum qui nominatus erit tutorem dato. Sive | is eave, cuilus nomine 
ita postulatum erit, pupil(lus) pupillave erit, sive is, a quo | postu- 
latum erit, non habebit collegam, co//egave eius in eo municipio 
intrave | fines eius municipi nemo erit: ¢um is, a quo ita postulatum 
erit, causa co|gnita in diebus x proxumis, ex decreto decurionum, 
quod cum duae partes || decurionum non minus adfuerint, factum 
erit, eum, qui nominatus | erit, quo ne ab iusto tutore tutela abeat, 
ei tutorem dato. Qui tutor h(ac) I(ege) | datus erit, is ei, cui datus 
erit, quo ne ab iusto tutore tutela abeat, tam iustus | tutor esto, 
quam Si is C(ivis) R(omanus) et e¢ adgnatus proxumus c(ivis) R(o- 
manus) tutor esset. | 


In 1851 two bronze tablets, one with five columns, the other 
with two columns of text, were found near Malaga. They were 
protected from injury by a cloth wrapping and a casing of tiles, so 
that they had evidently been buried deliberately, perhaps to escape 
seizure. (For other theories, cf Dessau, Wien. Stud. 24 (1902), 
24.0; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 283.) The tablet with two columns 
contains a part of the charter of Salpensa, the other, a part of the 
charter of Malaca (no. 65). The provision made for choosing 
Domitian duovir (chap. xxiv) and the form of oath to be taken by 
magistrates (chapp. xx11, xx) show that the charter of Salpensa 
was granted by Domitian, and consequently subsequent to Sept. 
a.p. 81. A similar conclusion may be drawn for Malaca (no. 65, 
chap. 1x). he document antedates a.p. 84 because Domitian 
does not bear the cognomen Germanicus. To confine our attention 
to the political relations which these two towns bore to the outside 


[ 372 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


world, it is clear that Salpensa, at least, had only Latium minus, 
because only local magistrates with their families and with the 
members of the second generation in the male line acquired Roman 
citizenship (chap. xx1, cf. p. 192). Evidently decurions who had 
not held a magistracy did not enjoy this privilege. Nothing is said 
about the acquisition of Roman citizenship in the extant fragments 
of the /ex Malacttana, but in all probability the two towns had the 
same political status, and it is proper to take it for granted that the 
same provisions held good for both municipalities. The phrase, 
“if any citizen of the mun. Flav. Salp. qui Latinus erit” (chap. 
XXVilI), shows that there were Roman citizens, as well as Latins, 
in Salpensa, and they had the right to vote both in Salpensa and in 
Rome, and in the lex Malacitana (chap. LIII) provision is made for 
their assignment to a particular curza. ny 

Up to the time of Vespasian Malaca was a crvitas foederata, and 
Salpensa probably a czvitas stipendiaria (Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 
293 ff.). This emperor gave them Latin rights (Pliny, N.H. 3. 3. 
30). That this gift of Latin rights was made by Vespasian in the 
case of Salpensa, at least, is evident from the reference to this 
emperor in the charter (chapp. xx11, xxu). It is confirmed by 
Titus and Domitian. Since these privileges emanate from the 
Flavian emperors, the two towns are munictpia Flaviana, like so | 
many other Spanish municipalities (CJL. uy, S. p. 1160). 

In the /ex Salpensa provision is made for the election of Domitian 
to the duovirate. Under the early empire other members of the | 
imperial family might receive this honor. Tiberius seems to have _ 
restricted the privilege to the emperor (p. 63). In Salpensa the 
prefect representing the emperor is chosen by him, but in other 
municipalities the power to make the choice could be delegated to ,, 
the local senate (CJL. 1x, 3044), in which case the prefect bore the 
title praefectus imperatoris ex senatus consulto. 

The article in the /ex Malacittana which governs the election 
of patroni prescribes a quorum of two-thirds of the members of 
the senate and secret balloting, but it does not expressly forbid 
the election of a Roman senator cum imperio (chap. Lx1; ¢f. 
no. 26). 

That many of the provisions in these charters were adopted from 


[373° 


Col. 1. 


Io 


T5 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


the corresponding usages in the city of Rome seems to be clear from 
the /ex Malacittana, chap. LXIv. 

Unfortunately chap. Lx1x which deals with the judiciary is in- 
complete. A minimum of 1000 sesterces and a maximum, not 
named, are certainly fixed. Perhaps in suits involving less than 1000 
sesterces, the aedile was competent (Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 335); 
while actions involving more than 1000 sesterces and less than the 
unnamed maximum went before the duovir. Cases running beyond 
the maximum were probably heard by the proconsul (cf. commentary 
on no. 27). So far as we can infer, this local jurisdiction applied 
to all citizens, whether Romans or Latins. 

For the earlier literature on these charters, cf. Riccobono, p. 163. 
For the text with a commentary, cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 
267 ff. A translation of the two charters and a commentary on 


them may be found in Hardy, Three Spanish Charters, 61 ff. 


65. LEX MALACITANA 
(81-84 p. Chr.) 


CIL. u, 1964; Dessau, 6089; Bruns, 304; Girard, p. 1123 
Riccobono, p. 168. 


R(ubrica). De nominatione candidatorum. 


LI. Si ad quem diem professio | fieri oportebit, nullius nomine 
aut | pauciorum, quam tot quod creari opor|tebit, professio facta 
ert sive ex his, | quorum nomine professio facta erit, || pauciores 
erunt quorum h(ac) l(ege) comitiis ra|tionem habere oporteat, quam 
tot guot crelari oportebit: tum is qui comitia ha|bere debebit pro- 
scribito, ita u(t) d(e) p(lano) r(ecte) I(egi) p(ossint), | tot nomina 
eorum, quibus per h. 1. |] eum honorem petere licebit, quod de|runt 
ad eum numerum, ad quem crea|ri ex h. 1. oportebit. Qui ita 
proscripti | erunt, ii, si volent, aput eum, qui ea co|mitia habiturus 
erit, singuli singu||los eitusdem condicionzs nominato, | ique item, 
qui tum ab is nominati erunt, si | volent, singuli singulos aput 
eun|dem eademque condicione nomina|to; isque, aput quem ea 
nominatio fac||ta erit, eorum omnium nomina pro|ponito ita u. d. 
p. r. 1. p., deque is om|nibus item comitia habeto, perinde | ac si 
eorum quoque nomine ex h. I. de | petendo honore professio facta 


67404 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


esset || intra praestitutum diem, petereque | eum honorem sua sponte 
coepissent ne|que eo proposito destitissent. | 


R. De comitiis habendis. | 

LII. Ex mviris qui nunc sunt, item ex is, qui || deinceps in eo 
municipio Itviri erunt, | uter maior natu erit, aut, si ei causa qu|ae 
inciderit q(uo) m(inus) comitia habere pos|sit, tum alter ex his 
comitia Ivir., item | aedilibus, item quaestoribus rogandis || sub- 
rogandis h. |. habeto; utique ea dis|tributione curiarum, de qua supra 
con|prehensum est, suffragia ferri debe|bunt, ita per tabellam feran- 
tur facito. | Quique ita creati erunt, ii annum unum || aut, si in 
alterius locum creati erunt, | reliqua parte elius anni in eo honore | 
sunto, quem suffragis erunt consecuti. | 





R. In qua curia incolae suffragia | ferant. 

LIII. Quicumque in eo municipio comitia riviris, | item aedili- 
bus, item quaestoribus rogan|dis habebit, ex curiis sorte ducito 
unam, | in qua incolae, qui cives R. Latinive cives | erunt, suffra- 
gium ferant, eisque in ea cullria suffragi latio esto. | 


R. Quorum comitis rationem habe|ri oporteat. | 

LIIII. Qui comitia habere debebit, is primum mvir. | qui iure 
dicundo praesizt ex eo genere in||genuorum hominun, de quo h. 1. 
cau|tum conprehensumque est, deinde proxi|/mo quoque tempore 
aediles item quaesto|res ex eo genere ingenuorum hominum, | de 
quo h. |. cautum conprehensumque est, || creandos curato; dum ne 
Culius comi|tis rationem habeat, qui I1viratum pe|tet qui minor 
annorum XXV erit, quilve intra quinquennium in eo honore | 
fuerint; item qui aedilitatem quaesturam||ve petet, qui minor quam 
annor. XXV erit, | quive in earum qua Causa erit, propter | quam, si 
c. R. esset, in numero decurio|num conscriptorumve eum esse non 
lice| ret. 


R. De suffragio ferendo. | 

LV. Qui comitia ex h. |. habebit, is municipes culjriatim ad 
suffragium ferendum voca|to ita, ut uno vocatu omnes curias in | 
suffragium vocet, eaeque singulae in | singulis consaeptis suffragium 
per ta|bellam ferant. Ttemque curato, ut ad cis||tam Culiusque Curiae 
ex municipibus | eiius municipi terni sint, qui eiius culriae non sint, 


Be cyeow 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


55 


60 


65 
Col. 11 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


55 


60 


65 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


qui suffragia custodiant | diribeant, et uti antequam id faciant 
qulisque eorum iurent, se rationem suffra||giorum fide bona habi- 
turum relaturum|que. Neve prohibeto, q. m. et qui hono|rem 
petent singulos custodes ad singullas cistas ponant. TLique custodes 
ab eo | qui comitia habebit, item ab his positi || qui honorem petent, 
in ea Curia quis|que eorum suffragium ferto, ad cuiius cu|riae cistam 
Custos positus erit, earum|que suffragia perinde iusta rataque sun|to 
ac si in sua quisque Curia suffragium || tulisset. 


R. Quid de his fieri oporteat, qui | suffragiorum numero 
pares erunt. | 

LVI. Is qui ea comitia habebit, uti quisque curiae | cuiius plura 
quam alii suffragia habuelrit, ita priorem ceteris eum pro ea curia || 
factum creatumque esse renuntiato, | donec is numerus, ad quem 
creari opor|tebit, expletus sit. Qua in curia totidem | suffragia duo 
pluresve habuerint, ma|ritum, quive maritorum numero erit, || 
caelibi liberos non habenti qui mari|torum numero non erit; ha- 
bentem libe|ros non habenti; plures liberos haben|tem pauciores 
habenti praeferto priorem|que nuntiato ita, ut bini liberi post 
no||men inpositum aut singuli puberes amis|si verive potentes amissae 
pro singulis | sospitibus numerentur. Si duo pluresve to|tidem suf- 
fragia habebunt et eiiusdem | condicionis erunt, nomina eorum in || 
sortem coicito, et uti quiiusque (sc) nomen sor|ti ductum erit, ita 
eum priorem alis renunti|ato. 


R. De sortitione curiarum et is, qui culriarum numero 
pares erunt. | 

LVII. Qui comitia h. 1. habebit, is relatis omnium || curiarum 
tabulis nomina curiarum in sor|tem coicito, singularumque curiarum 
no|mina sorte ducito, et ut cuilusque curiae | nomen sorte exierit, 
quos ea Curia fecerit, | pronuntiari iubeto; et uti quisque prior || 
maiorem partem numeri curiarum con|fecerit, eum, cum h. 1. iura- 
verit caverit|que de pecunia communi, factum crea|tumque renun- 
tiato, donec tot magistra|tus sint quod h. |. creari oportebit. Si 
toti||dem curias duo pluresve habebunt, | uti supra conprehensum 
est de is qui | suffragiorum numero pares essent, ita | de is qui totidem 
curias habebunt falcito, eademque ratione priorem quem||que 
creatum esse renuntiato. | 


Peles) 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


R. Ne quid fiat, quo minus comitia ha|beantur. | 


LVIII. Ne quis intercedito neve quit aliut fa|cito, quo minus 
in eo muncipio (séc) h. 1. |] comitia habeantur perficiantur. | Qui 
aliter adversus ea fecerit sciens | d(olo) m(alo), is in res singulas 
Hs X mu|nicipibus municepii (sic) Flavi Malacitani | d(are) d(amnas) 
e(sto), eiiusque pecuniae deque ea pecun. | municipi elus municipil, 
qui volet, cuique || per h. 1. licebit, actio petitio persecutio esto. | 


R. De iure iurando eorum, qui maiorem | partem numeri 
curiarum expleverit. | 


LIX. Qui ea comitia habebit, uti quisque eorum, | qui 11viratum 
aedilitatem quaesturam||ve petet, maiiorem partem numeri curia|rum 
expleverit, priusquam eum factum | creatumque renuntiet, lus- 
iurandum adi|gito in contionem (séc) palam per Iovem et dilvom 
Augustum et divom Claudium et divom || Vespasianum Aug. et 
divom Titum Aug. | et Genium imp. Caesaris Domitiani Aug. | 
deosque Penates: se ea quae ex h. |. facere| oportebit facturum, neque 
adversus | h. |. fecisse aut facturum esse scientem || d. m. 


R. Ut de pecunia communi municil|pum caveatur ab is, 
qui llviratum | quaesturamve petet. | 


LX. Qui in eo municipio 11viratum quaesturam|ve petent quique 
propter ea, quod pauciorum || nomine quam oportet professio facta | 
esset, nominatim in eam condicionem | rediguntur, ut de his quoque 
suffragi|um ex h. |. ferri oporteat: quisque eorum, | quo die comitia 
habebuntur, ante quam || suffragium feratur arbitratu eius qui ea | 
comitia habebit praedes in commune mu|nicipum dato pecuniam 
communem eo|rum, quam in honore suo tractaverit, | salvam is 
fore. Si d. e. r. is praedibus minus || cautum esse videbitur, praedia 
subsignato | arbitratu eiiusdem. Isque ab iis praedes prae|diaque 
sine d. m. accipito, quoad recte cau|tum sit, uti quod recte factum 
esse volet. | Per quem eorum, de quibus mvirorum quaes||torumve 
comitiis suffragium ferri opor|tebit, steterit, q. m. recte caveatur, 
elus qu co|mitia habebit rationem ne habeto. | 


R. De patrono cooptando. | 


LXI. Ne quis patronum publice municipibus munil|cipii Flavi 
Malacitani cooptato patrocinijumve cui deferto, nisi ex maioris 


[i 87s 


7O 
Col. 111 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


Col. 


50 


35 


60 


65 


70 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


partis de|curionum decreto, quod decretum factum | erit, cum duae 
partes non minus adfue|rint et iurati per tabellam sententiam tu||le- 
rint. Qui aliter adversus ea patronum | publice municipibus muni- 
cipii Flavi Mallacitani cooptaverit patrociniumve cui | detulerit, 
is Hs X n. in publicum munici|pibus municipii Flavi Malacitani 
d.d_e.; efis |] qué adversus h. 1. patronus cooptatus cui|ve patrocinium 
delatum erit, ne magis | ob eam rem patronus municipium (s7c) 
muni|cipii Flavi Malacitanitanii (sc) esto. | 


R. Ne quis aedificia, quae restitutul|rus non erit, destruat.| 

LXII. Ne quis in oppido municipii Flavi Malacita|ni quaeque 
ei oppido continentia aedificia | erunt, aedificium detegito destruito 
demo|liundumve curato, nisi de decurionum con|scriptorumve sen- 
tentia cum maior pars || eorum adfuerit, quod restiturus (s¢c) intra 
proxijmum annum non erit. Qui adversus ea fece|rit, is quanti 
e(a) r(es) e(rit), t(antam) p(ecuniam) municipibus municipi | Flavi 
Malacitani d. d. e., eiusque pecuniae | deque ea pecunia municipi 
elus municipii || qui volet, cuique per h. 1. licedit, actio petitio | 
persecutio esto. | 


R. De locationibus legibusque locatio|num proponendis 
et in tabulas mu|nicipi referendis. || 


LXIII. Qui nvir i(ure) d(icundo) p(raeerit), vectigalia ultroque 
tributa, | sive quid aliut communi nomine munici|pum eiius 
municipi locari oportebit, lo|cato. Quasque locationes fecerit quas- 
que | leges dixerit, quanti quit locatum sit et gui prae||des accepti 
sint quaeque praedia subdita | subsignata obligatave sint quique 
prae|diorum cognitores accepti sint, in tabu|las communes muni- 
cipum elus (sc) municipi | referantur facito et proposita habeto 
per || omne reliquom tempus honoris sui, ita ut | d. p. r. 1. p., quo 
loco decuriones conscripti|ve proponenda esse censuerint. | 


R. De obligatione praedum praediorum | cognitorum- 


que. || 
LXIV. Quicumque in municipio Flavio Malacitano | in com- 
mune municipum ellus municipi | praedes facti sunt erunt, quaeque 
praedia | accepta sunt erunt, quique eorum prae|diorum cognitores 
facti sunt erunt: il om||nes et quae cuiiusque eorum tum fuerunt 


eee 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


erunt, cum | praees (szc) cognitorve factus est erit, quaeque pos|tea 
esse, cum ii obligati esse coeperunt coe|perint, qui eorum soluti 
liberatique non sunt | non eruntaut non sine d. m. sunt erunt, ea||que 
omnia, quae eorum soluta liberata|que non sunt non erunt aut non 
sine | d. m. sunt erunt, in commune municipum | elius municipii 
item obligati oblilgataeque (sc) sunto, uti ii eave p. R. obligati 
oblillgatave essent, si aput eos, qui Romae aera|rio praessent, ii 
praedes izque cognito|res facti eaque praedia subdita subsigna|ta ob- 
ligatave essent. Eosque praedes eaque | praedia eosque cognitores, 
si quit eorum, in |] quae cognitores facti erunt, ita non erit, | qui 
quaeve soluti liberati soluta libera|taque non sunt non erunt aut 
non sine | d. m. sunt erunt, I1viris, qui ibi i. d. prae|runt, ambobus 
alterzve eorum ex de||curionum conscriptorumque decreto, qu|od 
decretum cum eorum partes tertiae | non minus quam duae ades- 
sent factum | erit, vendere legemque his vendundis dicere | ius 
potestasque esto; dum eam legem is re||bus vendundis dicant, quam 
legem eos, | qui Romae aerario praeerunt, e lege prae|diatoria prae- 
dibus praedisque vendun|dis dicere oporteret, aut, si lege praedia|toria 
emptorem non inveniet, quam le||gem in vacuom vendendis dicere 
opor|teret; et dum ita legem dicant, uti pecu|niam infore municipi 
Flavi Malacitani | referatur luatur solvatur. Quaeque lex | ita 
dicta erit, iusta rataque esto. || 
R. Ut ius dicatur e lege dicta praedibus | et praedis 
vendundis. | 

LXV. Quos praedes quaeque praedia quosque cog|nitores Iviri 
municipii Flavi Malaci|tani h. |. vendiderint, de iis quicumque || 
i(ure) d(icundo) p(raeerit), ad quem de ea re in ius aditum erit, | 
ita ius dicito iudiciaque dato, ut ei, qui | eos praedes cognitores ea 
praedia mer|cati erunt, praedes socii heredesque eorum | izque, ad 
quos ea res pertinebit, de is rebus || agere easque res petere persequi 
re|cte possit. 


R. De multa, quae dicta erit. | 

LXVI. Multas in eo municipio ab mviris prae|fectove dictas, 
item ab aedilibus quas ae|diles dixisse se aput 11viros ambo alter|ve 
ex Is professi erunt, 1vir, qui i. d. p., in | tabulas communes muni- 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


5) 


60 


65 


7O 


Col. v 


cipum elius mujjnicipi referri iubeto. Si cui ea multa dicta | erit 5 


[ 379 ] 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


590 


55 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


aut nomine eiius alius postulabit, ut | de ea ad decuriones con- 
scriptosve refe|ratur, de ea decurionum conscriptorum|ve iudicium 
esto. Quaeque multae non || erunt iniustae a decurionibus con|- 
scriptisve iudicatae, eas multas 11viri | in publicum municipum elius 
muni|cipii redigunto. | 


R. De pecunia communi municipum || deque rationibus 
eorundem. | 


LXVITI. Ad quem pecunia communis municipum | elius muni- 
cipi pervenerit, heresve eilius, isve ad quem ea res pertinebit, in 
die|bus xxx proximis, quibus ea pecunia || ad eum pervenerit, in 
publicum muni|cipum eiius municipi eam referto, Qui|que rationes 
communes negotiumve qujod commune municipum eius munici|pi 
gesserit tractaverit, is, heresve eilus || zsve ad quem ea res pertinebit, 
in diebus xxx | proximis, quibus ea negotia easve ratio|nes gerere 
tractare desierit quibusque | decuriones conscriptique habebuntur, | 
rationes edito redditoque decurioni||bus conscriptisve cuive de his 
accipi|endis cognoscendis ex decreto decurio]num conscriptorumve, 
quod decretum | factum erit cum eorum partes non mi|nus quam 
duae tertiae adessent, nego||tium datum erit. Per quem steterit, q. | 
m. ita pecunia redigeretur referre|tur quove minus ita rationes 
redde|rentur, is, per quem steterit q. m. rationes | redderentur quove 
minus pecunia redige|lretur referretur, heresque eius isque ad qu|em 
ea res qua de agitur pertinebit, q(uanti) e(a) r(es) | erit, tantum et 
alterum tantum municilpibus eiius municipi d. d. e., eiusque pe- 
cuni|ae deque ea pecunia municipum munil|cipii Flavi Malacitani 
<elus ea pecunia | municipum Flavi Malacitani> qui volet, cuique 
per h. 1. licebit, actio pe|titio persecutio esto. | 


R. De constituendis patronis causae, cum | rationes 
reddentur. 








LXVIII. Cum ita rationes reddentur, vir, qui decurio|nes 
conscriptosve habebit, ad decuriones | conscriptosve referto, quos 
placeat publijcam causam agere, iique decuriones con|scriptive per 
tabellam iurati d. e. r. decer||nunto, tum cum eorum partes non 
minus | quam duae tertiae aderunt, ita ut tres, qujos plurimi per 
tabellam legerint, causam | publicam agant, lique qui ita lecti erunt 


[ 380 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


tem|pus a decurionibus conscriptisve, quo cau||sam cognoscant 
actionemque suam or|dinent, postulanto, eoque tempore quod is | 
datum erit transacto eam causam uti quod | recte factum esse volet 
agunto. | 


R. De iudicio pecuniae communis. | 

LXIX. Quod m(unicipum) m(unicipii) Flavi Malacitani no- 
mine pe|tetur ab eo, qui elus municipi municeps incolave erit, 
quodve cum eo agetur | quod pluris us cro sit neque tanti sit, ut | 
de ea re proconsulem tus dicere tudiciaque dare ex hac lege oporteat: 
de ea're llvir praefectusve, qui iure dicundo praeerit etus municipit, 
ad quem de ea re in tus aditum erit, 1us dicito iudiciaque dato... . 





LXIV. 1. 56. pecuniam infore municipi, tab/et; perhaps pecunia in publi- 
cum municipum. 


LXVII, 1. 45. eius ea....Malacitani, dittography. 


See no. 64 and commentary. 


65a. EDICTUM L. ANTISTI RUSTICI, LEGATI DOMITIANI, 
DE ANNONA COLONIAE ANTIOCHIAE 


(ca. 93 p. Chr.) 


Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 55 (1924), 5 ff.3 Fourn. Rom. Studies, 
14 (1924), 180. 

L. Antistius Rusticus leg(atus) | imp(eratoris) Caesar(i)s Domi- 
tiani | Aug(usti) Germ(anici) pro pr(aetore), dic(it): | Cum mvir(i) 
et decurion(es) || splendidissim(ae) col(oniae) Ant(iochensis) | 
scripserint mihi propter | hiemis asperitatem an|nonam frumenti 
ex|arsisse petierintque ut || pleps copiam emendi haberet, | b. f- 
omnes, qui Ant(iochensis) col(oniae) aut | coloni aut incolae 
sunt, | profiteantur apud mrviros col(oniae) | Antiochensis intra 
tri||censimum diem quam | hoc edictum meum pro|positum fuerit 
quantum | quisque et quo loco fru|menti habeat et quan||tum in 
semen aut in | cibaria annua familiae | suae deducat, et reliqui | 
omnis frumenti copiam | emptoribus col(oniae) Antiochens(is) || 
faciat. Vendendi au(t)em | tempus cons(t)ituo in k(alendas) 
Aug(ustas) | primas. Quod si quis non | paruerit, sciat me, quid|quid 
contra edictum mel|lum retentum fuerit, | in commissum vindica-| 
turum, delatoribus prae/mi nomine octava por|tione constituta. 


[ 2g8.t.5] 


60 


65 


Io 


15 
20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Cum || autem adfirmatur mihi ante | hanc hibernae asperitatis 
per|severantiam octonis et | novenis assibus modium fru|menti in 
colonia fuisse || et iniquissimum sit famem | civium suorum prae- 
dae cui|quam esse, excedere sing(ulos) | (denarios) sing(ulos) modios 
pretium | frumenti veto. 

l. rr. b(ono) te(mpori), Rodinson: B (in margin), et, Ramsay. 


This inscription was discovered at Pisidian Antioch. The second 
column, containing the edict of Antistius Rusticus, is reproduced 
above. Prior to publication Professor D. M. Robinson kindly 
furnished us with the text and notes on the document. He 
believes that the famine referred to in the edict may be associated 
with that referred to in Revelation vi. 6, cf. Reinach, Rev. Arch. 
39 (1901), 350 Ff. 

The local magistrates of Antioch had been unable to meet the 
situation caused by the famine and consequent hoarding of grain by 
farmers and speculators. They appealed to the governor for legisla- 
tion to compel the merchants and producers to sell. ‘The edict is an 
early example of imperial interference in the regulation of prices 
in provincial towns. Although the famine must have been wide- 
spread, it may be noted that the edict does not apply to the whole 
province, but deals only with conditions in the city which presented 
the petition. Similarly in the reign of Trajan, Pliny and the emperor 
dealt with each city in Bithynia individually. The confession of 
impotence on the part of the magistrates of Antioch may have been 
a factor in the development of the policy of appointing curatores 
ret publicae to deal with problems of municipal government a few 
years later. For regulations in regard to control of local markets, 
cf. nos. gO and gt. 

Antioch was probably founded as a Roman colony prior to 27 B.c. 
although Ramsay favors a later date (ff R.E. 4, 531 f.; Ramsay, 
‘Fourn. Rom. Studies, 6 (1916), 83 ff.). In the proclamation of the 
governor the chief magistrates and members of the local senate are 
styled by titles current in the West rather than by the Greek equiva- 
lents. ‘he use of the Latin language in the eastern provinces for 
the edict of governors is rare (cf. no. 22). The Roman calendar 
and the Roman system of weights and coinage were also used. It 
may be noted that a distinction is made between co/oni, who were 


Dae te?3, J) 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


probably descendants of the veterans settled there by Augustus, and 
the zncolae, who probably represent the original members of Antioch. 
In the time of Domitian the two classes had not yet been placed on 
an equal footing politically, cf. Fourn. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 107 ff. 


66. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(81-96 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 11, 1945; Dessau, 1982. 


Imp. Domitiano | Caesari | Aug. Germanico | L. Munius Quir. || 
Novatus et | L. Munius Quir. | Aurelianus |. f. c. R. per honorem | 
II vir. consecuti || d.s. p. d.d. 


Found at Iluro in Baetica. On the grant of Roman citizenship 
on election to a local magistracy (czvitatem Romanam per honorem 


duoviratus), cf. pp. 191 ff. 


67. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(96-97 p. Chr.) 


B.C.H. 44 (1920), 73; dn. ép. 1922, no. 30. 


‘O Sipos éreiunoev tats Sevrépais | teats Mapxov Koxxniov 
Népovav | rov avtoxpatopa brratov Te atrodedet| ypwéevov, evepryéerny 
Kal radtpwva Kai ow||THpa yeyovoTa THs Toews, AtroxaberTa-| 
Kota O€ nuiv Kal tHv wWdrpLov édevOepil|av Te Kal qroNeTetar, 
érraivat, xpuoo. | orepdvar apioteiws, eixom yadrKhe épir|trat, 
mpoedptar €v Tois ayaa, apeThs || Evexa kai evvolas Kal evep- 
yeoias Ths | els EavTov. 

From Lagina in Caria. Lagina (Stratonicaea) was given freedom 
and autonomy by a decree of the Roman senate in 81 B.c. (no. 17). 
The city still enjoyed these privileges in the time of Pliny the Elder 
(N.H. 5. 109), and probably lost them asa result of the fiscal reforms 
of Vespasian. From this document we learn that Nerva restored 
the former privileges. It may be doubted whether Vespasian made 
any change in the municipal constitution when he cancelled the 
immunity from tribute, and the restoration of the ancestral zroAuteia 
ascribed to Nerva probably means nothing more than a return to 
the former status of Stratonicaea in the empire. 


[ 383 ] 


Io 


Io 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


68. EPISTULAE LABERI MAXIMI ET ALIORUM 
DE FINIBUS HISTRIANORUM 
(43-100 p. Chr.) 


An. ép. 1919, no. 103; Annales de Pacadémtie Roumaine, 38, no. 15; 
Wilhelm, Anzeiger der Akad. der Wissen. in Wien, 59 (1922), 
78 ff.; Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 329. 

‘Opobecia AaBepiov Makiuou. | 


Fines Histrianorum hos esse constitut........... Pe|ucem 
lacum Halmyridem a dominio.............. | Argamensium inde 
IUPO'SUMIMNON rere te iter ad c|ljonfluentes rivorum Picusculi et 
Gabrant inde ab im\o Gabrano ad capud eiusdem inde... .uxta 
rivum | Sanpaeum inde ad rivum Turgiculum.......... | a rivo 
Calabaeo milia passuum circiter D. VI...... | 


"EriotoAn LaBeivov. || 

Pra B.0s LaBetvos loetpiavav dpyovo[wv |, BovrAje, dyuor | yai- 
pevv. To rept llevxny bpeiv dixaco[y brrws | axépasov 81|aTnpn Oe, 
54 > \ > / / a > id ef 
€otat émiperes “Apovytios Prd[umat] Tae erdpxywt. Od|Tas 
yap avta@u éréotera. Aadnow dé cal Aiwdrvaver diadoyar | 
pov Kal els TO TravTEAes GvaTHOw Upas. "AXAN éricTOAy || TOD 
avtov LaBelvov. Pra. LaBeivos m[pecBevtis] “lorpslavav 
” a 5 / / AT Hits \ <n Wat 
adpxovoww, BovrHe, Snuws yaipev. Kai e xat[t]o ris kata tov | 
” * 0 t t / / ing RRs ds , 
Iortpov 6yOns TéXOS péxpis Bardoons Sinker Kal éx To|covTOV 
StactHpwatos apéotnkev 1) TOdLS aro TOV TOD | ToTAaM“OD aTo- 

/ é b] \ \ € a ig n 8 lal \ 
aTov Gums eel Kal ol mpecBes vuav || dveBeBarodvTo Kal 
"AovatiKos 0 Errapyos édeye oxedov | Exetyny povnv elvac Tis 
Toews TpoTodov THY eK TOD | TapEeryevosévou LyOvOs, edoka 
dely tuety Kata tHv [vpeTée||pav cvvyiOrav pévery THY adTnY 
adevav Tod Te adved[ewy] | ev rae Levens oTopate Kal Tod Tapa- 

/ \ 5a5 > \ e°N5N e / / / / 
épewv THY Oada || els THY EvosS ExaoTOUV xXpelav diya TédovS: 
mept | yap Tov THs Dns ypeLov avaudioByTnTa exere Spra | 
Kal THY €& éxetvov yphow racav Tat TéAEL [av ]uTevOuvor. | 

‘Exiotonn Tloprwviov Iletov. | 
/ a > lal BA la) / / 

Hopmeveos ITetos lorpiavév apxovety, [Bourie, Sypwwr ya li- 
pew. || Kai €x Tov yeypaupevov vuetv UTO Pr. LaBeivov [Kai 
Aimirs]|avod avépav émicnwotarav [Kal é]uol rermro[tatwy jy 
> Tf 0 v4 ¢€ ] Oé Qn / z n , 
avtt||AaBécOar bt. 4» acbévia THs Torews Kudlv mpovolas 


[ 384 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Tuvydver* po ovv] | mavrwy dpovtifovtos Tov Gevordrov [Kai- 
Tapos Kai ws AXNOAs cwTH || pos Hudr, iva pn povov Siapvray he 
ad[ra kal av&nOhu] || ra THv 7orAewv Sixaca, éréexperva THY TO |v 
k[ata orm ja elven ]s adu|evopéever iyOvav mpdcodov twetépav 
eivat, [ds] Sixaiwr tTad|ta Ta TENN OF TPOyovoL Vuar Kal TaTépes 
[THe] ydpete TOV Ye[Bacta |v | advadeitTws Ecyov. “ANAM ETrI- 
atody Udavtifov Ainelavod. | Tdavtios Atdsavos ‘lotpiavav 
adpyovow [yx laiperv. || To Wyidiopa vudv arédocdy poe oi Tpéo- 
Be[s K]adriotpatos | Anunrpiov cai Medias “Apteusdadpov. 
"HEvodre 5é Sua Tod Wn|dicpatos wapatreudhOjvar tHv evya- 
ptotovla jay [Tas] Texprwrdtar | jyuaov LaBelvor TpeaBeiar, 6 
Kat Ov avtTovy povoy tov YaBetvoy [a]lopévws av émoinaa. 
"HEvodre 8é nal ta ths Wevens vueliv] dOpavol|ra typety Sixaca. 
"Ey 6€ tocodTov améy[w] Tod Opadcai Tt TOV éx | ypovov dudac- 
gTomévov vpety Oixaiwv, ws Kal Tapeupety av 7délws bu’ Ov evérras 
Koopelv apyéav Tod Kai ‘EXAnvida Kal ets Tov L[e]|Balorov 
evoeBH Kal Wpos uds avTovs ovcav evol[e |V%. | 
"Emictovn Tovanriou Tepivou. || 

TovrAXwos Déutvos rpecRevtns Kai avtictpatnyos TB. KrXa(v)- 
dilov Kaicapos LEB. Teppavixod “lotpiavav apxovow, BovrAr, 
Sypuwe| xaipew. Ov mpéoBers tuov Anpyntptos XaBpias Xaipny- 
pov Anuntpsos Aicypiwv Ta.[...] [Me]idias | Avovucddwpos 
‘Hynoayopas “Apiotayopas M[ntpddwp los év|ruyovtes pow év 
Tomer 76 Wyidicpa vor érédocayr Kat ets Tov L[eBa]o||rov nuav 
émriderEdpevot evvoray auvncOnoay él ri THe] jwetépar v[yrel || ar 
Kal Tapovalar oTrovdeaTaTnY TroLnoduevor THY [TrEpl Oy éveret- 
Nag ||Oe avrots opwevrtav. ’Eruyvods ody (T)jv Kat mpos [mas 
avTovs THS|| Toews Voy SidOeowy Teipdcopat aet TLVOS U[wety 
aryabod| | yevéo Oat trapaitios. Iepi é Levens cal trav oropl[a- 
Tov dwdax |Oellis vireo TV mpécBewv vudv edixaiwoa TypicAat 
vuety TLa TOV Tpo||yovwy Vuwr OpLa. 


Exemplum epistulae | Mari Laberi Maximi, leg. Aug. pr. pr. | 
Imp. Caesari T'raiano Aug. Germanico 11 Iulio Fron|tino 11 cos. 
vu ka. Novembres. Descriptum || et recognitum factum ex comm, 
Mari Laberi | Maximi leg. Aug. pr. pr. Permitt..... | Fabio 
Pompeiano. Quae iam era .scri........ | Charagonio Phicora- 


AMA f 385.) 25 


35 


40 


45 


50 


35 


60 


65 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN | 


laestro conductore publici por|toriripae Thraciae postulante ut vectigal 


70 Hal\|myridis et Peuci daretur secundum veterem legem?|...... bit. 
Ius exigendi portorz........ Les! Pigs te arum dimensium usque 
I Ta ea | 


This document contains the letters of several governors of Moesia 
to the officials of the town of Histria. Laberius Maximus was 
governor in 100, Tullus Geminus in 54, Plautus Aelianus in 
52-53, Pomponius Pius in 51, Aemilianus in 50, and Flavius 
Sabinus in 43-49. From the frequency of the letters, we may 
infer that the privileges of the city in regard to their monopoly 
of salt fish, their forest rights, and even the extent of their terrz- 
torium, were being constantly called in question, probably by the 
agents of the imperial fiscus. From this document we also learn 
that the chief source of revenue of the city came from its fishing 
privileges, but there is no evidence to prove that these were a 
municipal monopoly, leased out to its residents. 


69. DECRETUM CHIORUM DE PECUNIA ADMINISTRANDA 
(saec. 1 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 948. 


iA [etvas tHv Saverow | Tod ypynuatos]| arralvTo]s, [ov- 
devos €yovt |los eEovciay Tav Sarv[evotav]...... | cataBorr[v] 
Tomoaclar ovdleuiav tov] apy||[v]piov Kat tev érrax[o |Aov- 
[O]ovvtwy tox[wv mpiv | T]o SceAOetv THY mevtaetiav. Aipe- 
[Ojvar | de] dvdpas oxTw év tais apyatpecias [eri] r[d|v] 
Savei[o |uov TOV xpnudtov peta THY aiplecty Tod | ayw|vobéTov 
10 TOV LeBactay ayovwv. “E[mevta O]é || TV weTaTTapdoocuy yet- 
veoOat vio Tov TeTe[AE]|KOT@Y TH[Y] Xpelav avdpady Sia arro- 
ypagdhs H(t) éval[rn](c) tH(c) Tod Tlowesdemvos, [€]oouéevns 
a[vt jar[o|y]pal js] va[6 rév] rapada[uBav ]ovt[ |v, ra[vto |s | 
15 TOD x[py]uatos eoopévns THs S[aveta]ews Kal|[O]ote m[poyé- 
yleartlat, tpolxataBarovvtwv tovt[av] | Kxat tolv alel 
xetplo|t[o]vn[O]noopévar a[vdp]ov z[nv | tT]od mpw[rou é]rous 
pet TpLlo nwep lav tp[cdv | rhs] Tod X[eBact od Teppave- 
Ko[v Kaica |pos uel pas | ye JvePdiLo Ju dei[vd ]pia Oy’* Kali, élav 
20 €uBorimos ayn||Tac jv, Kai tLov]rov mpocxataBanrxr0o(v)yT@v 


On 


eeeeeeee 


[ 386 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


This inscription from Chios is important for the regulation of 
endowment funds given to the city. Eight men are chosen to ad- 
minister the trust, which is to accumulate for four years. Then 
the accumulated interest is to be paid to the proper officials, In the 
case of similar endowments, e.g. that of Salutaris at Ephesus (no. 71), 
the consent of the provincial governor was sometimes secured. 
Such a provision may have been found in the portion of the decree 
which has disappeared. 


70. SMYRNAEORUM PORTARIA 
(saec. fere I vel 11 p. Chr.) 


I.B.M. 1021; Ditt. Sy//.3 1262; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1427. 


neg Wal Cane oh ore Sst mater | [T]ovs 7roAAods Kw[AVO vce 
[xou|v ]wvety THs mopOueias, mplos] | dé TovTous avTi S00 dBo- 
A av] || So dcodpia tremroinkace tLdv] | vadrov, dv avto TodTO 
kai o[uv]lecrnKotes Kal K@dvovTes | TOV Bovddpevoy TropOwev- 
[ew, | O]arws éravlay]ces adtots of [dello]uevoe THs rop[Ouletas 
xpa[v|rlar: opotws dé x[ai] mepi tas a[d|A]as mropOueias Ka- 
Koupyova[s kl|alta tavtd: édo€e thu Bovane x[ai | tole Syuas, 
KAUAL LAIN | CATO |, solu pvt seve esis e ke 

From Smyrna. ‘The document is apparently a decree of the city 
regulating the ferry traffic across the Hermus. Not enough of the 
inscription is preserved to enable us to determine whether the city 
was concerned in the regulation of the traffic because of a possible 
loss of revenue (cf. no. 128 where the ferry was a civic monopoly), 
or from a desire to keep the peace. 


71. EPISTULA AQUILI PROCULI, PROCONSULIS 
ASIAE, AD EPHESIOS 
(104. p. Chr.) 


ILB.M. 481 (pt. 1v, p. 246, ll. 336 ff); Laum, Szftungen, 74. 

[Axovirrsos IpdxXos, 0 Naumrpo|tatos, Edeo[i]wv dpy[over, | 
Bovry, Snpas] yaipesv. | [OvetBcov Larourdprov dvr la trois Te 
ado les maci[v | worel’Tnv apiotov Kal Tpo|tepov év moA[Aol|s 
THs éav||[Tod purorewptas TroAAG TE Kal ov|y ws EtrvyEev Tape ]- 
oxnuévov | [rapadeiywata elds, dotrep|] Hv déEvov, év Tots 


[ 387 ] 25-2 


Lon | 


16) 


345 


poe 


She 


360 


305 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


[ote ]evorat[oss | nuwv etyov pirous: viv 8é, é|met tHy ev Tol AL 
mponip|ntrat | [weyiotous Te Kai aEtoNoyw|rdrots Swpor[s Koa ]- 
phoat pel[yarorpemas els Tern THs] Te érruparlectarn|s Kal 
peyia||[tTns Beds “Aptéuidos kat Tod] olxolv trav YeBaot |ov Kat 
THs | [vaerépas modews, Tols dé moreltas eis Stavoluas Kat 
KdH|[pous Kabcépwxe Onv. Sucpdpta, voulfw Kal Judas, | ed’ ots 7d | 
[cremroinxey Upetv Kal viv émravyédreTat ayabot|s, ypnvat THe Te | 
[prrorecuiar avtod avtarododvat Kal THe evpev|eias, a Tpos || 
[recuny avdtov endicate. Svvyidopar 8 vpety eis TO érrat|véoat 
te Tov | [avdpa Kai akidoat adrov Sixaias tap ety] papt- 
pias | [wpos TO Kal mrelous yevéoOar Todvs Kata ta] divata 
mpo|[@vpoupévous eis Ta Sora. Ta 8€ UT’ avrod Kate |povpeva 
xypy|[wata Kal Ta areixovicopata THs Oeod Kal Tas] eixovas 7 
THOM eee a rates eee eee yep etek ss sea |. ] eravovde 
Bare eg Se lexpno[...... |. Je ovdéva BlovrAomar vulvt TpoT[we 
ovdevi oTE Tapevpéces ov|[d Jeusas wetLaBarety 7} wlaparral Ear 
TL T@OV UT avTov diaTeTaypélly wv: et S[E Tis émre|yerpylao lec 7 
Nda[as 7) TapadrAdéar te THv | Vd vuely dia TolvTov tLod 
Wndicpatos cupwOncopéver | 7] eio[nynloacOai te TovoldTov 
meipacel, vToKeiaOw eis mpoo|xloo[u]now THs Kxupias ‘Apré- 
polos On. B w(uptows) € Kai eis Tov tep| |oTaTov dickov adrois 
bn. [dtouupiows mevtakioyetriots Kai || od]dev EXaTTOV éoTw 
dxoupov [arav To wapa THY] Kabtel[pwow. Svv|7]So(c)ula]e Sé 
avTa. eis TO Taow [viv havepav yevé|oOac t[Hv | Tle mpos THY 
Oeov evoéBeraly Kal Thy rpds Tovs Ye]|Bacro[vs | lal tiv mpds 
THY TOW €[Upmevetav avTov év TL] Oedtpar. | *"Epp[woGe]. 
From Ephesus. Of the great inscription which records the en- 
dowment founded by Vibius Salutaris for the benefit of his fellow- 
citizens at Ephesus, we have given only the letter of the governor 
ratifying the gift and naming the penalty imposed on anyone who 
should seek to void or disregard the provisions of the foundation. 
We rarely find a record of such ratifications by imperial officials 
(cf. Laum, op. cit. nos. 194, 162, 206), and the act was probably 
unnecessary, but the submission of the terms of the gift to the 
emperor or to the governor was inspired by motives of vanity and 
by a desire to bring the individual or the city to the notice of the 
central government. ‘This procedure gave an excellent opening for 


[ 388 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


imperial interference in municipal matters, and undoubtedly led 
to the development of paternalistic tendencies. In general, endow- 
ments which provided for the-distribution of money to citizens 
were deprecated (cf. no. 101; Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 116, 117). 
Since Salutaris provided that 450 denarii should be distributed 
annually to the senators at the rate of a denarius apiece, we learn 
that the Ephesian senate normally had 450 members at this period 
(cf. the commentary of the editors of the 1.B.MZ. ad loc.). Laum 
points out that fully half of the endowment assigned to provide a 
dole to the six tribes at Ephesus had disappeared or had been diverted 
to other uses within a few years after the foundation (op. czt. 1, 
222. ft); 
72. TTTULUS OPERIS PUBLICI 
(rrr p. Chr-) 

An. &p. 1904, no. 59. ! 

Imp. Caesar | divi Nervae f. | Nerva Traianus | Aug. Ger- 
manicus || Dacicus pont. maximus | trib. pot. xv imp. V1 cos. V | 
p. p. redacta in formam | provincia Arabia | Viam Novam a finibus || 
Syriae usque ad | Mare Rubrum aperuit | et stravit per C. | Claudium 
Severum | leg. pro pr. || CLXVI. 


This inscription and no. 103 record the completion of public 
works under the order of the emperor for the benefit of provincial 
communities. For a similar inscription of an earlier date, cf. no. 31. 


73. SENATUS CONSULTUM ET EPISTULA TRAIANI 
AD PERGAMENOS DE LUDIS INSTAURANDIS 
(112-117 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 11, S. 7086; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 336; Alterthiimer von 
Pergamon, Vil, 2, 269. 

(Primi versus omisst sunt) 

We baritiseicisicysin oa carey. atpatnyot cal.|..]o[v] KXavdiouv LerAa- 
vod apxtepéws|..... COS uae eae las s. c. factum de postulatione 
Pergamenorum(?) | placere ut certamen illud, quod in honorem templi 
Tovis amicalis et | Imp. Caes. divi Nervae f. Nervae Traiani Au- 
gusti Germanici Dacici || pontzficts maximi est constitutum eicedac- 
TiKov in Civitate | Pergamenorum, eiusdem condicionis sit, cuius 


[ 389 ] 


Io 


T5 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


est quod in honorem Romae | et Divi Aug. 1bi agitur, ita ut ea 
impendia, quae propter id certamen | frert oportebit, cedant in onus 
Tuli Quadrati clarissimi viri. | ........eorumque ad quos ea res 
pertinebit. || [Kedanraiov éx r]@v Kaicapos évrok@v. | Cum 
secundum meam constitutionem certamen in civitate | Pergamenorum 
ab Iulio Quadrato amico clarissimo viro quinquennale, | quod dicttur 
eloeAacTLKOV, constitutum sit idqg. amplissimus ordo | ezusdem turts 
esse decreverit, Culus est quod in eadem civitate || 2 honorem Romae 
et divi Aug. institutum est, huius quogq. ise(l)as|tzcz zdem quod in 
altero certamine custoditur dare oportebit | victorzbus praemium. | 
[Adroxpatwp Kaicap @eot Nepova vilis Népovas Tpaiavos 
~A \ \ / ’ N / 

ptatos | [SeBaoros Teppavixds Aaxcxos, ap]}xcepeds pméytoros, 
Snuapyixns || [éBovcias TO &., av’ToKpatwp TO.., Uma]tos TO 

/ \ / a A a ‘ a / 
s', matnp matpioos, | [Ilepyaunvarv the Bovrne cat TH]t Snuor 

/ ’ / e A / > / : le | y 

yaipew. | [EXGovens tua rpecBeias, arrodeEa]uevos avtis TO 
te d&iwpa | [kal Ta cuyypaupata, wept TavTwv ad év avT lois 


pb) 7 i / 

nEiooate cuyxatebéunv | [.....+eeeeeeeess MelT]acxouTe, 

eriTpéem@ ovv U||[wiv.......+e+e+-JAOvT@Y ev ayopaiols | 

[tHE cs or: ss. | TON GEM PLOY Dla Leu Gy le seer tn eae 
Sea! \ ‘ \ ¢€ 

Rigen TOD@ | Ole Kt TAS UT One ts nehel csi ele iar 


From Pergamum. This inscription deals with the relations of a 
senatorial province to the emperor and senate. When Julius Quad- 
ratus wished to establish games in honor of Trajan in Pergamum, 
the emperor was apparently consulted first. He referred the matter 
to the senate, and when they approved the request, the emperor 
issued the edict instead of the senate (secundum meam constitutionem). 
He also confirmed the senate’s action in making the games equal 
in rank to those in honor of Augustus. The letter of Trajan in 
Greek is too fragmentary to permit an accurate interpretation, but 
it apparently deals with some remission of the market-tax during 
the games. If so, the tax was probably an imperial one levied in a 
senatorial province. For Julius Quadratus, cf. Waddington, Fastes 
des provinces astatiques, 114. 


[ 390 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


74. EPISTULA PROCURATORUM AD 
COLONOS VILLAE MAGNAE 
(116-117 p. Chr.) 


Bruns, 114; Girard, p. 870; Riccobono, p. 352. 


Pro salute | Aug(usti) n(ostri) imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) ‘Traiani 
princ(zpzs) | totiusque domus divine | optimi Germanici Parthici. 
Data a Licinio || Maximo et Feliciore Aug(usti) lib(erto) procc(ura- 
toribus) ad exemplum | /egis Manciane. Qui eorum zntra fundo 
villae Mag|ne Variani id est Mappalia Siga habitabunt, eis eos agros 
qui su| dcesiva sunt excolere permittitur lege Manciana | .. .ita 
ut eas qui excoluerit usum proprium habellat. Ex fructibus oh e€0 
loco nati erunt, dominis au¢ | conductoribus vilicisve eius f(undi) 
partes e lege Ma|nciana prestare debebunt hac condicione: coloni | 
fructus culusque culture quos ad aream deportare | et terere debe- 
bunt, summas deferant arbitratu || suo conductoribus vilicisve ezus 
f(undi) et si conducto|res viliczve eius f(undi) in assem partes 
col(on)icas datur|as renuntiaverint tabellisgue obsignatis...f s ca- 
vea|nt eius fructus partes, quas prestare debent, | conductores vili- 
cive eius f(undt) coloni colonicl|las partes prestare debeant. Qui in 
f(undo) villae Mag|nae sive Mappalia Siga villas habent habebunt | 
dominicas dominis eius f(undi) aut conductoribus vilicisve | eorum 
in assem partes fructuzm et vinearwm ex | consuetudine Manciane 
cuzusque gene||ris habet prestare debebunt; tritici ex a/ream partem 
tertiam, hordei ex aream | partem tertiam, fabe ex aream partem 
qu|artam, vinu de laco partem tertiam, ol|ez coacti partem tertiam, 
mellis in alve||zs mellaris sextarios singulos. Qui supra | quinque 
alveos | habebit in tempore quo vm|demia mellaria fust fuerit, | 
dominis aut conductorzbus vili||cisve eius f(undi) qui in assem par- 
tem... | d(are) d(ebebit). Si quis alveos, examina, apes, vasa | 
mellaria ex f(undo) villae Magne sive M|appalie Sige in octonarium 
agrum | transtulerit, quo fraus aut dominis aut || conductoribus vili- 
cisve eis quam fiat, alu|ez, examzva, apes, vasa mellaria, mel qui 
in eo f(undo) | erunt conductorwm vzlicorumve in assem ezus | f(undi) 
erunt. Ficus aride arboresve aliaeque extra poma|rio erunt, qua 
pomarium intra villam ipsam || sit, ut non amplius iusta vindemia 
fiat, colon|us arbitrio suo coactorum fructuum conducto|ri vilicisve 


Peckeid 


Col. 1 


IO 


15 


20 


Io 


20 


25 


30 
Col. 111 


5 


Io 


15 


20 


Col. Iv 


Io 


T5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


eius f(undi) partem tantam d(are) d(ebelit). Ficeta vete|ra et oliveta, 
que ante hance Jegem sata sunt, ex consuetu|dine fructum conductori 
vilicisve eius prestare || debeazt. Si quod ficetum postea factum erit, 
eius ficeti | fructum per continuas ficationes quinque | arbitrio suo 
e7 qui serverit percipere permittitur, | post quintam ficationem eadem 
lege qua s(upra) s(criptum) est | conductoribus vilicisve eius f(undi) 
p(restare) d(ebebit). Vineas serere || colere loco veterum permittitur 
ea condicione uf | ex ea satione proxumis vindemis quinque fructus | 
earum vinearum Is qui ita secuerit suo arbitrio per|cipzat itemque 
post quinta(m) vindemia(m) quam ita sata | erit, fructus partes 
tertias e lege Manciana conduc||toribus | vz/icisve eius in assem dare 
debe| zt, Olivetum serere colere in | eo loco qua quis incultum 
excolulerit permittitur ea condicione ult ex ea satione eius fructus 
oliveti q|uid ita satum est per olivationes pro|ximas decem arbitrio 
suo percipe|re debeat, item post olivationes (decem) olez | coacti 
partem tertiam conducto||ribus vilicisve eius f(und1) d(are) d(ebebit). 
Qui inserue|rit oleastra post o/ivationes guinque par|tem tertiam 
d(are) d(ebebit)........in f(undo) | ville Magne Varzanz sive 
Mappaliae | Sige sunt eruntve extra eos agros qui || vicias habent, 
eorum agrorum fruct|us conductoribus vilicisve eius d(are) d(ebe- 
bunt); custodes e|xigere debebumt. Pro pecorague intra f(undum) 
ville M|agne sive Mappalie Sige pascentur, in pectora sin|gula aera 
quattus conductoribus vilicisve do||minorum eius f(undi) prestari 
debebumt. Si quis ex f(undo) ville | Magne seve Mappalie Sige 
fructus stantem pen|dentem, maturum inmaturum caeczderit, ex- 
cider|it, exportaverit deportaverit conbuserit desequer|it sequentis 
ézenii detrimentum conductoribus vilicisve eius f(undi) | coloni erit 
ei cul de..,. | tantum prestare d(ebebit). 82 gui in f(undo) ville 
Mag|ne siv(e) Mappalie Sige arbores frugiferas se|verunt severint its 
e1us superfictet usum || quie legitimo....... fibestamen iS. 4 cee 
suplerficies...hoc tempus lege Manciana | ritu.. .fiducieve data 
sunt dabuntur. ..zd| . . ve ius fiduciae lege Manciana servaditur. . . 
Qui || superficiem ex inculto excoluit excoluerit zbique | .. .aedi- 
ficium deposuit posuerit zsve qui co/uit colere | desierit perdesierit eo 
tempore, quo ita ea superfices | coli desit desierit, ea quo fuit fuerit 
ius colendi dumtaxa|d biennzo proximo ex qua die colere desierit 
servatur || servabitur; post biennium conductores vilicive eorum. . . | 


[ 392 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Ea superficies que proxumo anno culta fuit et coli desi|erit con- 
ductor vilicusve eius f(undi) e cuius ea superficies esse dicit|ur 
denuntiet superficiem cultam...... | denuntiationem denuntiatur 
.., testa. ..,.— || o 1temque in sequentem annum perszstat ea sine 
quere|/a eius f(undi) post biennium conductor vilicusve co/ere de-| 
beto, Ne quis conductor vilicusve eorum inquilinum ezus | f(undi). 
Coloni qui intra f(undum) ville Magne seve Mappalia Sige habit-| 
abunt dominis aut conductoribus vilicisve in assem qgu\jodannis in 
hominibus szmgulis in arationes ope|ras n(umero) 11 et in messem 
op........generis | singulas operas binas prestare debebunt. Co- 
loni | inquilini eius f(undi) intra. . .anni njomina sua conductorzbus 
vilicisve....in Custo||dias singulas qu............. nent | ratam 
seorsum...um, | Stipendiariorum qui in f(undo) ville Magne sive 
Mappa|lieSige habitabunt.. . . uas cljonductoribus vilzczsve. . . cust-|| 
odias f(undi) servis dominic. . . nit est | (quae sequuntur quinque lineae 
legi non possunt.) Hec lex scriptaa Luro Victore Odilonis magistro, 
et Flavio Gemlinio defensore; Felice Annobalis Birzilis. 


I, ll. 16-17. daturas; daturos se, Rostowzew. 

I, 1. 17. sine fraude sua; f s, ¢ab/et. 

II, 1. 10. eis quam; usquam or eis qu(i) (in) a(sse)m, Gradenwitz. 

II, 1. 13. arboresve aliae que, Schulten; arborum earum quaeque, Ros- 
towzew, taking ficus aride as a genitive. 

ITI, 1. 12. in fundo, ¢sab/ez; Qui agri herbosi in fundo, Rostowzew. - 

IIT, 1. 23. desequerit = desecuerit, Touzain. 

III, 1. 24. fundi, tale; perhaps fundi prestare debebit, Schulten. 

IV, 1. 1. coloni, zab/et; Si culpa coloni, Schu/ten. 
IV, 1. 1. ei cui de...; ei cui debet partes colonicas alterum, H. Krier. 
IV, ll. 5-6. Gradenwitz remarks that the sense requires qui e legitimo iure 
ad hereditatem eius venient vel testamento instituti heredes erunt. 
IV, 1. 8. ritu...; pignori(s) t(itulo), Gradenwitz and Dessau; Schulten 
gives sense of passage: Si quae aedificia superficiesve post hoc tempus 
e lege Manciana pignori obligata fiducieve data sunt dabuntur eorum 
in biennium colono heredi eius fiducia e lege Manciana servabitur. 

IV, ll. 16-22. Schulten restores the sense as follows: Ea superficies que 
proximo anno culta fuit et coli desierit conductor vilicusve eius fundi 
el cuius ea superficies esse dicitur denuntiet superficiem cultam colen- 
dam esse; si post hanc denuntiationem denuntiatas cessare pergat 
itemque insequentem annum persistat, ea superficies sine querela eius 
post triennium conductor vilicusve eius fundi colere debeto. 

IV, 1. 19. after denuntiatur Schu/lten finds on stone essegabit or essechatis. 

IV, 1. 21. Schulten thinks eius fundi 4e/ongs after conductor vilicusve. 


E339 3s 


20 


25 


30 


So 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


IV, 1.23. after fundi Schulten conjectures that plus quam.. .prestare 
cogat has fallen out. 

IV, 1. 26. after messem Schulten proposes operas n...et in sarritiones 
culusque. : 

IV,1. 29. after vilicisve the words eius fundi edere et operas have been 
suggested. 

IV, 1. 30. after singulas the words quas agris prestare debent have been 
proposed. 

IV, 1. 33. after vilicisve the words eius fundi prestare debeant ave been 
suggested. The words Hec lex, etc., stand at the bottom of the first 
column. 


An altar found in 1896 at Henchir Mettich in Tunis. The 
inscription is written on all four sides of it. For list of articles bearing 
on it, cf. Bruns, Girard, Riccobono, and Rostowzew, Gesch. d. 
rém. Kol. 322 ff. Trajan’s title of Parthicus fixes its date. It con- 
tains, after a dedication of the altar to the emperor (ll. 1-4), a letter 
of the procurators. At the bottom of the first column stand the 
words hec lex scripta, etc., here printed at the end. The letter is 
addressed to the co/oni of the villa Magna Variani sive Mappalia 
Siga (cf. col. 1, ll. 6-7), and settles certain disputes between them 
and the conductor. There are three main points at issue: What part 
of the produce is due from the tenants? How many days’ labor do 
they owe to the conductor each year? What rights have they in 
new land put under cultivation? Perhaps the general regulations of 
the /ex Manciana (cf. pp. 17 ff.) on these points are at variance with 
local usage, and need to be modified. More probably, however, as 
in the case of the sa/tus Burunitanus (cf. no. 111), the conductor has 
been demanding more than the law allowed. At all events the 
procurators settle the dispute in this letter, in which they set forth, 
in a form adapted to the purpose and perhaps modified for the 
locality, the pertinent regulations of the law mentioned above. This 
document is engraved by the local representatives of the colonz, 
the magister and the defensor (cf. p. 19). The lex Manciana, being 
intended for all the estates within a given district, covers both 
imperial domains and such private estates as still exist. The dominz, 
to whom frequent reference is made, are probably private owners, 
or possibly head-tenants (cf. Heitland, Agricola, 343). The con- 
ductores are agents in charge of imperial or private estates. The 
vilici are subordinate overseers. Outside of the administrative classes 


[i 39455) 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


the document speaks of co/oni, or regular tenants, inguilini, possibly 
landless residents on the estates (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 3413 cf. 
however, Seeck, R.E. 4, 496), and stipendiari, perhaps occupants 
ofan ager stipendiarius within thelimitsof the fundus (cf. Rostowzew, 
op. cit. 341). This ager stipendiarius may be identical with the ager 
octonarius (11, 1. 8), z.e. the land upon which eight denarii were to 
be paid for each acre (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 341). Licinius 
Maximus (1, ll. 4-5) seems to be the procurator tractus Kartha- 
giniensis, and Felicior, the freedman, is procurator of the local 
saltus. Of the names mentioned at the bottom of the first column, 
Lurius Victor, the son of Odilo, is the local headman. The full 
title of defensor would probably be defensor gentis, although this 
official is not to be identified with the later defensor civitatis (cf. 
Toutain, Nouv. rev. hist. d. droit fr. et étr. 21 (1897), 389 f). 
Whether Flavius Geminius or Felix, son of Birzil, and grandson of 
Annobal, holds this position is uncertain (cf. Toutain, op. cit. 23 
(1899), 411-412; Schulten, bh. d. kénigl. Ges. d. Wiss. zu Gét- 
tingen, phil.-hist. Klasse, Neue Folge, 11, no. 3, p. 36). The main 
provisions of the document are these: The co/ont may put under 
cultivation the subseciva, or small tracts of land not already cultivated 
(1, ll. 6-9). In return they are to pay the part of the produce fixed 
by the /ex Manciana (1, ll. 10-20). Those who occupy farms, 
orchards, or vineyards, or keep bees must pay according to the 
consuetudo Manctana (1, |. 20-11, |. 6). Honey fraudulently taken 
to the ager octonarius (to avoid the usual payment?) will be confis- 
cated (11, 1]. 6-13). The rental in the case of dried figs and olives 
is determined by usage (11, ll. 17-20). ‘Those who set out an orchard 
of fig trees or a vineyard may have all the figs or grapes for five years, 
but after that they must pay rental (11, Il. 20-30). An olive orchard 
planted on uncultivated ground is free for ten years (111, ll. 2-10); 
wild olive trees, put under cultivation, for five years (111, ll. 10-12). 
For each head of cattle four denarii are to be paid (m1, ll. 17-20). 
If anyone damage or take away property, a penalty is fixed (111, 
ll. 20-24). Transfer of land is allowed on certain conditions (iv, 
ll. 2-9). After two years abandoned property goes to the overseers 
(tv, ll. 9-21). The co/ont must render a certain number of days’ 
work free, probably six, each year (tv, ll. 23-27). The zzguilinz, and 


[ 395 ] 


On 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


probably the stzpendiari, must register (tv, ll. 27 ff). From the 
fact that farms could be abandoned (rv, ll. gq—21), it would seem to 
follow that at the beginning of the second century tenants were free 
to leave an estate. 

The rental, including, as it did in most cases, one-third of the 
produce of the land (1, Il. 25 ff) and six days’ labor on the private 
land of the contractor, seems rather high, but on the other hand 
the privilege granted to sub-tenants of bringing waste land under 
cultivation and of enjoying the entire return from it for a period of 
five or ten years, seems to show a desire to keep the co/oni on the 
land and confirms the conclusion that they were at liberty to give 
up their holdings. 

‘The small number of days’ labor exacted of the tenants each year 
seems to indicate that slave labor was freely employed on this 
estate, although there is only one reference to slaves in the docu- 
ment (iv, 1. 35), and although we should naturally suppose that 
there must have been a scarcity of slaves at this time in consequence 
of the comparatively small number of prisoners taken in foreign 
wars. For a fragmentary inscription dealing with the imperial 


domains, cf, 4n. ép. 1913, no. 72. 


75. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS TRAIANI 
AD ASTYPALAEENSES 
(117 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR, 4, 1031; IG. xu, 3, 175. 

Avtoxpatwp Kaicap Qe0d Tpaiavod [IapOixod] | vios, Geod 
Nepova viwvos, Tpaiavos [ Adpravos] | 2eBactos, apyrepeds péyt- 
o7os,onulapxexns | €Elovoias, bratos 10 8’, ActuTran[ aréwr Tots || 
dpyoluc. kai tHe Bovarye cai THe Sypor yaip[ew. | Kal wa]pa 
Tov mpeaRevTod vuav Ie[tpwviov tod | ‘Hpdxw|vtos Kal éx Tov 
Wwndicpat[os vuav | Ewabov] dorras naOnte SiadeEapér[ou euod | 
THY Tat |porav apynv, éravécas S[é vuds || e¢ adNO]as thy 
édevbepiav v[ piv 0 TaTHp wou edwxev, avTHY KaTAaKUpoCAS... 

This inscription is engraved on the same stone as no. 36, and 
comes from Astypalaea. We have adopted the restoration proposed 
by Domaszewski (Ditt. Sy//.3 832, note). Apparently the privileges 


[ 396 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


granted to a state by any emperor were valid only during his reign, 
and had to be confirmed by his successors (cf. nos. 4.0, 130). Astypa- 
laea had once been an ally of Rome (Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. 
d Asie, 114), but it seems that its freedom and immunity from 
taxation had been curtailed (cf. no. 76). : 


76. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI 
AD ASTYPALAEENSES 
(118 p. Chr.) 


Lafoscade, 19; Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1032¢; IG. x11, 3, 176; Ditt. 
Sy1.3 332. 

Av’toxpatwp Kaicap, Geod Tpaiavod Ilap@ix[od] | vids, Oeod 
Nepova viwves, Tpaiavos ‘Adpsavos | LeBaotos, apysepeds pé- 
ytoTos, Onuapxixns | éEovoias, Uratos To 8’, AcotuTaratéor || 
dpyovat kai THLE BovaAnt Kal TH. Sypwwr yaipew. |’ Evrvyov vudv 5 
To. Whdicpari, dre wev atrolpeiy dare Kai ov SivacOai Tereiv 
TO émayyeAd|TLxOv apyvpLov éwavOavor’ ov nv oTrd|cov TE TODTO 
ovdé éx mote héperv avTo HpEac[Ge.... 

From Astypalaea. The liberty of the Astypalaeans had been 
taken away by the Flavian emperors and restored by Trajan (cf 
no. 75). From this document we learn that the aurum coronarium 
was paid by free cities as well as by others. This tax had been re- 
mitted by Hadrian in Italy and lessened in provincial cities (Hist. 
Aug. Vit. Hadr. 6). Apparently the payment of the tax had been 
a serious burden for the Astypalaeans, and they sent an embassy 
to the emperor to ask for its remission. Cf. 4th. Mitt. 48 (1923), 


99 f- 


77. EPISTULA LEGATI AD POMPAELONENSES 
(119 p. Chr.) 

CIL, 11, 2959. 

Claudius Quartinus | 11 viris Pompe/(onensibus) salutem. | Et 
ius magistratibus vestri | exequi adversus contumaces || potestis et 5 
nihilominus, qui | cautionibus accipiendis de|sunt, sciant futurum 
ut non | per hoc tuti sint. Nam et | non acceptarum cautionum peri-|| 
culum ad eos respiciet et quid|quid praesentes quoque egerint, | 10 
id communis oneris erit. Bene | valete. Dat(um) non(is) Octubri- 


[:397)3] 


15 


Io 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


(bus) Ca|/lagori imp(eratore) Caes(are) Traiano || Hadriano Aug- 
(usto) 111 co(n)s(ule). 

Bronze tablet from Pompaelo in Tarraconensis. The last sentence 
fixes the date as a.p. 119. The writer’s name in full is Ti. Claudius 
Ti. f. Pal. Quartinus (cf. Boissieu, Jnscr. de Lyon, 284, no. 38). He 
was at this time /egatus of ‘Tarraconensis. The letter is written at 
Calaguris (or Callagoris) Nasica, the birthplace of Quintilian. Its 
interest lies in the fact that it seems to confirm the judicial compe- 
tence of the local magistrates in the matter of requiring a cautio 
(cf. no. 27). Mommsen would correct guogue to quique. 


78, EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI AD EPHESIOS 
(120 p. Chr.) 


Lafoscade, 23; Ditt. Sy//.3 833. 

[Adroxpatwp] Kali]oap, e0d Tpai(a)vod Ilap@cxod vids, | 
[Gcot Nepova v]iwves, Tpaiavos ‘Adpiavos XeBacros, | [apyvepeds 
bléytotos, Snuapyexns éEovacias to 8, | [Urratos T]0 x’, Edeciov 
THL yepovoiar yaipery. || [Méttvos] Modeotos 6 Kpatuctos ev 
érroinoey Ta Oix|[aca viv Katalveiwas ev THe Kpioes érrel Sé 
monrxrovs eonrAL@aate] | opletept |SecOar ypnuata vuérepa, ovoias 
Tov Sedavio[pée]|volv «latéyovtas, ob dacKkovtas dé KAnpovo- 
pty, Tovs [dé] | kal [ad]rods ypewotas dvtas, réroudha vuov 
TO avt[iypadgor] || Tob Wndicpatos Kopynrias Ipeioxwt tHe 
Kpatiatw: | avOuTratw., iva et TL ToLovTOY ein emridéEnTai Twa, | 
Os Kplvel Te Tapia ByTovpEva Kal eiompakes TavTa | doa av 
opeiAntat Tht yepovaiat. “O mperBevav jv | KaoKnédrXos I [ov]- 
TLUKOS, @L TO eod.soy So0OnTw, ef ye pr || TpotKa vréloxe|To 
mpeaBevoew. EKvtuyette. Ip(o) & x(aravdev) “OxtwBpior. | 
[T'pappatevortos Io |mrdiov “Pouteiriov Bacaou, 

From Ephesus. The members of the gerusza at Ephesus had lost 
money by bad investments and appealed to the governor for assistance 
in solving their financial difficulties. The former governor of the 
province had given them some help in this matter, but the properties 
of certain debtors had passed into the hands of new owners, and 
these claimed that they did not inherit the obligations of the former 
owners, as they were not their heirs-at-law. The emperor instructed 


[ 398 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


the present governor to appoint a judge to settle these cases and 
exact the amounts due to the gerusta. The right of tpwrompaéia, 
or first lien on property, was thus granted to the gerusza by the 
emperor. Trajan refused to grant this privilege to Bithynian towns 
to the detriment of private individuals, unless the city already had 
acquired the right from former emperors, who, apparently, had 


granted it freely (Pliny, Epp. ad Traz. 108, 109). 


79. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI (?) 
AD HERACLEOTAS 
(121-125 p. Chr.) 


B.C. Hear r8q7), 162. 


SETAE ot AevToupyeiTwoav’ ol O€ KEKTNMEVOL MOVOY Tats THE | 
[wronee € |rriBarXopévars Aectoupytass UrevOuvor Ectwoay: Tiva | 
[dé det tp lomov oropyvcbar Tas odovs, Kowa. Siatadyuwate édy- 
Awoa: | [Ke]Aevm kat ANTANOTS ocuvtereiy vpety eis ta 
avarkopata, || TO Tpitov cvvecadépovtas: 7 Sé cuverapopa ye- 
véo Ow atro | Trav é€v Maxedovias dvrav ANTANON. Euruyeire. | 
IIpo uy’ karavdav ‘louviwy: amo Avppayiov. 

This inscription is said to have been found on the site of Heraclea 
in Macedonia. Heraclea was a free state (Caesar, B.C. 3. 34; 
Strabo, 7. 7, p. 326). From this letter we learn that the citizens 
of this city, who owned property, were responsible for the main- 
tenance of that part of the Egnatian Way which lay within their 
territorium, or, possibly, of the roads which led from the main 
highway through their district, since the plural form oédovs is used. 
It is probable that the cévitates berae were required to keep in 
repair the state roads which passed through their domains (ef. 
Le Bas-Waddington, 2806). In the case of Heraclea the citizens 
were helped by the ANTANOI who were required to contribute a 
third of the expense. Perdrizet thinks that the reading of this word 
is incorrect, but offers no emendation. He assumes that it refers 
to some corporation of traders in Macedonia who were concerned 
in the proper upkeep of the roads (B.C.H. 21 (1897), 162 f). The 
reading ’Arivravot is suggested by Holleaux (Rev. d. ét. gr. II 


(1898), 273 ff). 
[ 399 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


80. EPISTULA LEGATI LYCIAE, VALERI SEVERI, 
AD RHODIAPOLITANOS 
(225 p.-Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 16; Lafoscade, 104. 


Ovarrjpios YeovAplos, w]pecBevtns YeBaorod | ‘Podsarrones- 

tov [ap]yovar, BovrAnt, dnuat | yaipev. ‘Os a€sod[ re], "Omrpapoar 

5 A[m]oArwvilov dis tod Kada[iddolu, dvte caroe cal al|yabar 

Toneitne Kall ov] povov ths ald tuav paptupilas, ad]ra Kal 

Ths amd | Tov €Ovous érri[Bonoews TUXOVTL TELmas] | Duds Wdi- 

Ceo[Aar ndéws éritpérra. | “Eppa@oOar vulas evyouar. *A[ve- 
10 yp]ad[y] || emi dpye(epéos) “Atrddov tod Paviov, Aciov a’. 


We have included a few (nos. 84, 87, 97, 99, 102) of the in- 
scriptions engraved on the walls of the mausoleum of Opramoas, 
a distinguished citizen of Rhodiapolis in Lycia. Before his death, 
Opramoas collected a series of honorary decrees and letters from the 
emperor and provincial governors and had them engraved on the 
tomb which he had erected. ‘They constitute an important record 
for the study of the relation of the central government to the 
municipalities of the province and to the co.vov. From them we 
learn that honorary decrees were submitted to the governor or to 
the emperor by the xowvov and by the cities, that the governor 
had the right of vetoing such decrees, and that an appeal could be 
made to the emperor over the veto of the governor. ‘This is the case 
with decrees conferring unusual honors. It was, apparently, the 
practice of cities to refer honorary decrees to the governor or 
emperor, probably through motives of vainglory or servility, for 
many of the documents on the monument of Opramoas are mere 
acknowledgments by the officials, and there is no indication that 
their sanction of the action of the city was required. In the docu- 
ment which we have given above, the Rhodiapolitani ask for the 
approval of the governor in conferring honors upon Opramoas. 


[ 400 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


81, RESCRIPTUM IMPERATORIS HADRIANI (?) 
AD PERGAMENOS DE COLLYBO 
(125 p. Chr.?) 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 484; Alterthiimer von Pergamon, VitI, 2, 279. 


set © 8 @ ovUmEV TW S16 @2759 8 26.8.6 6 ®©6 0@© @ @ 8 6.673056 6.9 8 @ @ © peTemrep. |- 
Wapunv, Bovrnbeis pelv] pail|[verOar dixavos Kata THY euavTod 
avy |nOevav, pova é Tadta é€etaca | [Ta éykAnpaTa TOV épya- 
Coméver tr |i THS TOAEwS (U)u@v avdpar, Tepi wv || [0 dtoaTaneis 
vp wvuov mpecBevtns K]arovicios TAvKcwv édidakev nas. 
Ila|[petvar 8 éxéXevca avtovs, wa SArlov iv et te réyeuv 
éBovrovto. ‘O ody THs al[peirews TpoTros ov voutmos HY, AJ|A(A)a 
Tapa TO dikatoy Kal Tapa THY cuVadrayny | [wpdTTEW avTois 
élaétperrov. Ilapa yap Tav épyactay Kai KkaTydov Kal TOV 
o|[yrapromwmr@v elis Tov eTTOV Ewrodady EeiwHoTwY YadKOoV 
Sexaoxtw acaadpia || [To on |vdp[sov] AawBdvev odeirovtes Kal 
Tots TO Onvaplov Siadrdaocev Bov|[r louévos[s po |s [6 je[xa lerra 
Sid0vat ovK HpKodVTO THY TOV accapiwy apme|uv, adda Kal 
éav Snvapiwy apyup@v Tis ayopacnt TO ovpaptov, Kal” Exalatov 
dnvapiov eicétrpaccov accapiov év. “Kdokev ody jwely Karas 
” > \ \ fa) lal / \ / a 
éyew | eis [T]o Aoutrov TodTO SiopOAcbat, iva wy) cvpPRaivne Tots 
avntais UT avtav || reXwvetcOat, Kal wv ovdeuiav avTots éEou- 
/ / / e / nA lal > / 
ciav Sed0c8ar cvpRéBnxev. |"Oca pévtor TOY NeTTOY orapiwv 
oTaOua. TimpacKkopeva TYLaTaL LTO | TAY ayopavopwrv, TOUTwY, 
Kav THeElovas pvas @VHTwYTAl TIVES, Hpe|oTEV Tucty THY TYLNV 
avTovs S1ddvar Tpds Képwa, Bote aT avTav aewa|fecOae THe 
TOAEL THY EK TOV KONAVBOU Tpocodov. “Opmoiws Kai éav Trelollves 
cuvOéuevor apyupov Snvapiov ddEwow nyopaxévas eita Sd.at-| 
nr \ / \ é 5 / \ a > / 
pOVvTal, Kab TOUTOUS AETTTOV OLOOVAL YAAKOV TwL OvapLOTTeXAN, 
/ > / p Ea," \ , ‘ 6 6 / be \ 5 \ 
iva avaldépntar ért tHv tpamelavs dvdovar Sé pds SexaeTTa 
dooapua, érrei|O1) 7) THS auerTTiKHs Epyacia(s) Soxet povots Tots 
épyactais Siaréyer|Oar. "H(A)E(y)xOncav peta TodTo Kal Erepa 
Tia ovVKEYwPNKOTES Eav||TOls KEpOaY OvoOM“aTa doTpaTovpay TE 
Kat TO Kadovpevoyv Tap avTots | tpocpaytov, dv ov émnpéalov 
padota Tovs TOV ixOvv TimpacKovtas. | Kal tadra ody édoxi- 
, A a \ \ ~ 7 en 
pacapev Si0p0Gc0ar* TreoventeicOat yap Tovs | OXrtyous va 
’ An , (4 n S / \ n > \ 
avTav avOpwrovs 8(7r)ov nv, cvvéBawvev S€ Tac aicOn| THY 
ryelver Oar Tois MvoUpévols THY AOLKOY TOV TETpacKoVvT@Y En||ulav. 


AMA [ 401 ] 26 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


oo 


60 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


3 / \ J > / \ a > A > / 
HtiaOnoav Kal @s éveoptadia Tapa Tov épyacTav eioTpdo- 
cov|tes, dmep apvovpévav avtov Hdéws ériatevov, TOD 2) Odel- 
New | yelverPar TO ToLodTO KawBdvwv Kal Thy Tap’ avTav 
/ / f ¢ / a c if 
cuveatabecw. | Movov pévtot @poroyouv ta. “TrrepBepetaiwr 
pnvi diSoc8at éav|tots TO eis TOV “Epuh Aeyomevov €x ToLavTns 
adhopuns' dpkov éautois || amatety cvveeywpnabat Tapa Tov 
évTOA@VT@Y TO AETTOV Kal | Tpds AUTOS avadEpovTwY TrEpl TOD 
pndev avtovs tapa tHv bia|takw tretounkévat. Tods ody dia To 
cuverdos ouvovat un Svvapé|vous dcddvat Te avTots, OoTE 1) THY 
A> / 3’ ‘ c if, A b] 7 7 ? 
Tov ouv¥vat avayKny UTopé|vetv* 0 ovK edoEeV Adoyov. ’AvTOL- 
yUvat MEVTOL Kat aUTOVS Tots Epy[ac |||Tals Trepl TOU pwNndev avTOVS 
NOLKNKEVAL EV THL TOV apyupovd vopio[wa]|tos Soces Kal avTO 
dixatov nynoaunyv. “ENéyovto Kai évexvpalai]las éavtots tovet- 
> / ¢t/ nm b] fal yA > lal 
cbav) émitpéme ONaS TE TOV Epyactav éo[O bte] | Kparety 
\ b ] / an fal 3 lal / > \ 
Tas €uTords, THS TvVarrAaY|h|s ov TOUTO curYwpov[ons |, | aAdXa 
emi TovS Tapulas avTovs TwapayelverOat Kedevovor[s, av] || 
> / / \ cee / / U lal 
aitidowvrTal Twa, Kal Tap éxeivov Snuocioy NauPBar[ey dod]|- 
Aor, iva vowipmws To@vTa THY évexupaciary, Wate [TO TPO THS| | 
Kpioews TOVTML THL TpoTaL ANPOEV pévew ToLis opetroue |s. | Kai 
a 5 yy ¢ an e/ > / / c/ 
TovTo ovv édokev nuciv otTas ddeirew yeir[ecOar, O7]ws 
al C10: \ \ nw / t 7 \ 
me|puetyev 1) Exdoats, Kal Oia TOD Snuootov pévTot [SovrAOV p17) 
/ ss 2 \ b] } > VN AVE \ \ / 
ov |upe||tpov elvar Thy evexvpaciay, adra7) TO ixav[ ov po Kpic |ews 
ALa]uBa|vecOat, } éav Sodvat tis uy SbvnTar TO o[vuBora |tor, 
eivale Td élvéyupov bcov dv TO Tpayua Kal TO ew avTau 
[wpoc]tiuov ju. [Tas pévtloe xpiloes yeiverOar wy ert Tov 
n 2] 1259 \ lal b] f ’ lal = ’ an 
Taptalv, adr Ja ert TOV eotparn[ynK |oTwr | avdpav éE atroXoyhs 
evrAoL you ei |var vomit, ére dé Told]s pév Talluias petéxery THS 
/ A \ AS id 3 ‘6 
xpeltas «]aOjov, rolvs] dé éo[tpalryl[yn«loras | Kat éumetpous 
eiva[iKal.......olus tay rpayudt[@ |v [Kali we... .pov|tas To 
THS Tepluyryvouerns] ovalas adtods arrolot |e[pe liv Suvdpelvor, 


TOUNOC sa, xin 251 oe de Bae ae a hhh RAKED ENGL COUN TOU AL oe 
/ > ry dh 7 la 3 \ \ b] 
Tehavars | eel Spevovtas éyvwpev rose icOas avtovs THY éveyu- 
DPUCINU AKG) tH. tic. ae eee veeeeeees | Tals ayopaios Timpacko- 
s7achithy i AAS, La rs oe seveceees+-@9 Otb0c8at TédoOs, GAD’ 

EAT Aspe fais 4 4-45). os a VO LEDRLUE gah y) eee 


From Pergamum. This rescript is assigned by von Prott (4th. 
Mitt. 27 (1902), 78 ff.) to the emperor Hadrian. The city of Per- 


[ 402 ] 


——— rr —“‘—SOS— 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


gamum issued bronze coins and the right of exchanging them for 
the Roman denarius was given to contractors at a fixed rate of 
exchange on condition that a certain percentage of their profits 
should be paid to the municipal treasury. The contractors had 
changed the rate arbitrarily, so that both they and the city gained 
an increased revenue. The merchants protested by appealing to 
the emperor who summoned both parties to give evidence. In his 
rescript he reviews the evidence and gives his decision in favor of 
the merchants and traders. In this document we have evidence 
of a municipal monopoly. The Greek cities which retained the 
privilege of issuing coins apparently compelled local traders to con- 
duct business in the local currency, and the exchange of foreign 
money was regulated by municipal laws. From the exchange a 
certain amount of revenue was derived (cf. CIG. 2053). The right 
of exchange was either let to contractors, as in this case, or was 
conducted by the city with officials appointed for the purpose (cf. 
Reinach, B.C.H. 20 (1896), 523 ff, where the evidence for public 
and private bankers in the Greek states is collected). Cf nos. 132, 
199. Fora full commentary, cf. von Prott, /oc. cit. 


82. EPISTULA AVIDI QUIETI, PROCONSULIS 
ASIAE, AD AEZANITAS 
(125-126 p. Chr.) 


CIG. 3835; Le Bas-Waddington, 860-863; Lafoscade, 93; Ditt. 
Or. Gr. 502; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 571; CIL. ur, 355 and S. 7003; 
de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico, 57. 

’Aovidios Kouvijtos Aifavertav apyovot Bourne | Snowe yxai- 
pew. AudicBytyots rept yopas iepas, avalteDeions Tadar THL 
Avi, tpetBopévn Tod\rdOv ETaV, THLE Mpovolat Tod | peyiorov 
avToKpatopos TéXous éTUXe. “Enel yap éwéoteira avTas dn||NOv 
TO TpaypLa brov, Hpouny Te OTL Ypr) ToLelv, dVO TA | wadduoTa 
tv | Svahopav bpetv Kervodvta Kai TO ducepyés Kal duvcevpeTor 
tod | rpaypyaros Trapexopeva, pelEas THt HriavOperws TO Sixavov 
aKorov|Ows THe Tepl TAS Kpioes ETTLpEeretat Ty |v TOdVX[p ]ovcov 
twav paynv Kal vrrovpillav mpos addAndovs EdAvaer, Kaas eK THs 
émiatoAs iv erewev mpos me | pabnoerOe, Hs TO avTiypadhov 
bpety wétouba. “Enéctevra O€ “Korépws tw é7i|TpoT@s TOD 


[ 403 ] 26-2 


4 


nr 


15 


20 


II 


Io 


III 


Io 


IV 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


YeRacrod, bras yeouérpas émitn(d)[elous] AcEdpuevos exeivors | 
Tpocxpnontar THY yopav SiapeTpav Kak [TovTOU ayado |v bpeiv 
yevnoerat. | Kal é« tav iepov Tod Katicapos ypaypatoly vpeiv 
SjedijrAw@Ka Stilo) Sei Tel\Netv brép éExdotov KAHpov KaTa THV 
[rod Kaicapos aro |pacuv é& 5 av 4|uépas NaBnTE THY éTLTTO- 
jv. “Exact[os dé To TéXOS THL| lepol tapyias THs] | yopas TerEceL, 
iva un madw tives aludsoBntodvtes Tept adtis Tod] | Bpddecov 
droradcar Thy TOMY Ths [pocnKovans mpocodov Tapaitiot] | 
yévovTas' apKel yap avTois TO méypt VL Ov amroNeAauKEVvaL TOUT, 
Ilévrop|||lba Sé cai ths pds” Korrepov éruato[Ajs TO avtiypapov 
kal 45" Eorepos é]|uol yéypadev. “Eppdabas buds evyo[ mar]. 

Exempl(ar) epistulae Caesaris scriptae ad | Quietum. | Si in 
quantas particulas, guos c/eros appellant, ager Aezanen|si lovi dicatus 
a regibus divisus sz#, non apparet, optimum est, || sicut tu quoque 
existimas, modum qul in vicinis civitatibus | clerorum nec maximus 
mec minimus est observari. Et si, cum | Mettius Modestus con- 
stitueret, ut vectigal pro is pendere|tur, constitit qui essent c/eruchici 
agri aequum est ex hoc | tempore vectigal pendi. Si om constitit, 
iam ex hoc tempollre vectzgal pendendum est. ft si quae morae 
quaerantur | usque dum pendant integrum, dentur. 

Exempl(ar) epistulae Quieti scriptae ad | Hesperum. | Cum 
variam esse clerorum mensuram | cognoverim, et sacratissimus 
imp(erator) con||stitutionis suae causa neq(ue) maximi neq(ue) | 
minimi mensuram iniri iusserit in ea re|gzone, quae Iovi Aezanitico 
dicata dicitur, | mando tibi, Hesper(e) carissime, explores qu|ae 
maximi cleri mensura, quae minimi zm || vicinia et zn ipsa illa regione 
sit, et id | per 4itteras notum mihi facias. 

Exempl(ar) epistulae scriptae Quie|to ab Hespero. | Quaedam 
negotia, domine, non ali|ter ad consummationem perduci || possunt, 
quam per eos qui usu sunt | eorum periti. Ob hoc, cum mihi in- 
lunxisses ut tibi renuntiarem, quae | mensura esset clerorum circa 
re|gionem Aezaniticam, misi in rem | praesentem ei. . . 


From Aezani. In this group of documents we have an example 
of administrative arbitration. Lands sacred to Jupiter had been 
confiscated by the Greek kings and parcelled out in allotments. The 
holders paid a rental to the municipality and also to the imperial 
fiscus. For this reason the governor refers the dispute, not to the 


[ 404 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


senate, but to the emperor. The dispute which had arisen is not 
clear, but apparently the tenants had acquired larger holdings in 
the course of time and continued to pay the same rental as on the 
original smaller leasehold. The emperor instructs the governor to 
find out the average size of such leaseholds in neighboring states 
and regulate those of Aezani accordingly. In the governorship of 
Mettius Modestus the question had arisen as to what lands were 
cleruchic. Apparently, some tenants had ceased to pay rental and 
had held the land as if entitled to absolute ownership (cf. no. 55). 
Mettius had been called upon by the city to reestablish the title of 
the state to the confiscated property. 


83, EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI 
AD STRATONICENSES 
(127 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1156a; Lafoscade, 23; Ditt. Sy//.3 837; 
Riccobono, p. 325. 


Avroxpatwp Kaicap, Qeod Tpaiarv[od] | Hap@txod vids, Geod 
Nepova viwvo[s], | Tpaiavos “Adpsavos LeBactos, ap[xue]|peds 
péyltaTos, OnuapxiKhs é€o[ va t]||as T(0) ca’, Urratos T(0) y', Adptavo- 
m[Lo]|AecTOv Utpatoverre[w |v trois dpy[ov]|ov cat the BovrRe kab 
Tat Syuar yaipey]. | Aicaca a&tobv pou Soxeire Kal avayKxaia 
a[p || Teyervouévne Tore? TATEOdV TEAN TAELK]| || THS K@pas Sidmpe 
bpeiv, cal rHv oixiav Ti[8.] | KrXavdiov Lwxpdtovs thy otcav 
év tHe [mo]|dec  émioxevalérm Lw@xpdtns 7) atrodd[a]|A@w Tivi 
TOV eTLY@plorv, ws wn xXpover [Kal | a]werdiae KaTapLpOein. 
Tadra éméoterrAa Kal [7dz || cplatiorw: avOvrdatrat Xteptivior 
Kovap[tiver] | cal tds érrutpotrast pov [Ilo ]urnios Leov[jpae |. | 
"EmpéoBevoev Kr. Kadvdcd0os, be To épodiLov] | d0OnTa, ef pr 
mpoika umécyntat. | Hutuxeite. Kaddvdats Maptiais azo 
‘Po||[w]ns. KA. Kavdidos arédwxa tHv émiato|[A]yv Aoddtwr 
‘Povatixas dpyovts The mpo a’ ida[v]| Matwv év tHe exxrAnoiar. 

From Stratonicea-Hadrianopolis. This city had been founded by 
Hadrian himself by the grant of civic status to a village on the site. 
The form of government is that usually found in Greek states, 
with archons, senate, and popular assembly. The calendar, however, 


[ 405 ] 


Oo 


Lal 


Io 


T5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


was Roman. The city was unable to support itself and pay the 
requisite tribute to Rome. On appeal to the emperor, Hadrian 
remitted the taxes—ra TéAn Ta éx THs ywpas. It is possible that 
the mention of the imperial procurator in this connection should 
be interpreted as a reference to rents from public lands of the 
emperor (Weber, Unters. Gesch. Hadr. 136 f.), which he assigns 
to the new municipality. On the policy of creating new munici- 
palities in Asia, cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 100 ff. 
The second request of the embassy is an interesting example of 
the petty problems referred to Rome by the cities in this period. 
‘The house of Socrates had fallen into disrepair, and the emperor 
gives orders that the owner should restore the building or sell it 
to some citizen of Stratonicea. There is no evidence that this 
house had been converted into a shrine because Hadrian may have 
resided there during his visit to the city (cf. Weber, op. cét. 138). 


84, EPISTULA LEGATI LYCIAE, POMPONI VETTONIANI, 
AD COMMUNE LYCIORUM 
(128 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 143; Lafoscade, 103. 


[UW Joprer[ios ’A [tT ]eo[tvavos Povricovravo]s [Od]lertwv- 
avos mpecBe[utys Kal] avtiLotpat }n|yos, THe KowwHe Tod EOvous 
apxatpeciaxhe €x|KAnolar yatpew. Td texpav tors ayabods || 
avdpas Karov éotiv: pdrlilora eEarpét[w]s | avadaivere: 
aotep kal v[d]lv “AmroAXr@|viws Sis Tod Kadrrdudbdov, o[s] dpmetv 
apytepéa | Tov viov €GerXovt[w]|s mapléocxy |ntat, Kal ad|ros Tapa- 
yevouevos diroltemoluuévar Kat || aveévte vpety Tov éavt[od 
TrovTo |v, es Koo|ov THs Tod eOvous aéilas pap]|tupe@ | r[alis 
Tetpais Tats eis adtoly bd byov] S0|@ncopévats THY TE TpO- 
e6[piav éritpé|ro | kupwOAvat adtas Tov Tle eiovovta (?) apxee]- 
péa || viov [av]rod "ArroArwuvifov..... 

See note on no. 80. In this letter the governor approves in 
advance the honors which the provincial assembly proposes to confer 
upon Opramoas, and apparently ratifies the election of his son to 
the chief priesthood of the province. There is no evidence that 
the provincial assembly was required to submit their action in either 


[ 406 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


case to the governor or that he exercised veto powers in the elections 
of provincial officials. For the veto of the governor on provincial 


decrees cf. no. 97. 


85, EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI AD EPHESIOS 
(129 p. Chr.) 


Lafoscade, 26; I.B.M. 3, 487; Ditt. Sy//.3 838. 

Av[to]kpdtwp Kaicap, Qeod [Tpaiavod] | Uap6[t]xod vios, 
Geod Nep[olva v[ijwor[os], | Tpaialy]os ‘Adpsar[o]s SeRac[rés, 
ap |yteped[s] | wéyso[To]s, Snuapy[cKy |s éEoucilas 76 ty’, bratos 
70 ¥, || matA[p mat ]pisos, Edlect |v tots a[p]yovo[s cal tHe 
BlovrAne xaipew: | A.”E[p]actos cai ror[et|rns t[w]adv [e]ivac 
d[now «jai rordd[axss] | wALedo Jae t[) |v Oddac[car, cat oloa 
ato Tov[ Tov duvlaros | ypnovulols yevéo[Oar tHe tarp isu, cal 
tov €Ov[ous Tt ]o[ds] Hrye|wovas del Sila ]xoulioar], é[ulol dé [ts] 
n6n aulvémrev joer, || TO pev mpetov eis “Podov aro Tis 
"E[éloou col pwefopé[vwr], | viv dé amod.’EXevoeivos pos buds 
adix[v Joupér[ ws, Bovr letale]| é BovrAeut ns yevéc Pac: Kayo t[ nv | 
pev [Soxelwacialy é]p’ vyety | mocoduar, ef Sé pndev évTrodav 
[eore kal doxet THs TL]uns aE[clos, | 70 apyvptov, bcov diddacuv 
ot BovActortes, [Soow THs apyat|pecias [élvexa. || Edrvyetre. 

From Ephesus. Hadrian requests the Ephesians to elect Erastus 
to the municipal senate. The scrutiny of the qualifications of the 
candidate is placed in the power of the city, while the emperor 
promises to pay the requisite swmma honoraria (cf. Pliny, Ep. ad 
Trai. 112, 113). Nothing is known of the method of election to 
the senate at Ephesus in this period beyond the indications given 
in this letter. If the word dpya:pecias is properly restored in 
]. 14, it may indicate that senators were elected at the special 
meeting of the senate or assembly at which the usual magistrates 


were elected (cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. a’ Asie, 199). 


86. PRIVILEGIA CONCESSA DIANAE EPHESIAE 
AB IMPERATORE HADRIANO 


(129 p. Chr.) 
Ditt. Sy/7.3 839. 
Avtoxpatopa Kaicapa, Geod | Tpaiavod WapOxod vidv, Oeod | 
Nepova viwvor, Tpaiavov ‘Adpiavov | LeBacrov cal ’Ordprroop, 


[ 407 ] 


On 


lanl 


5 


Io 


15 


Io 


T5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Snuap||ycens éEovcias TO (t)y', Uratov | To y', TaTépa TraTpisos, | 
) Bourn Kal o Shwos 0 Edecion | rov idtov KTictHY Kal owTHpA, 
dia | Tas dvuTrepBAHTovs Swpeas ‘ApTé||ucds, Sudovta TH Oe@ TaV 
KAnpo|vomwav Kal BeBAnkdTav Ta dixata | Kal Tods vomous 
avTns, cevtotrou[mias S| | am Aliyimrou tapéxovtTa, Kal ToOvS 
Auuevas | wolenoav|ra TAwTOUS, aTooTpéavTa Te || Kal TOV 
Bralirrovta tovs | ALypévas Totapov | Kdvotpov dia To. . 

From Ephesus. In visiting this city, Hadrian granted to the 
priests of the goddess Diana the right of receiving inheritances in 
the name of the divinity. Cf Ulpian, Frag. xx11, 6: deos heredes 
instituere non possumus, praeter eos, quos senatus consultis con- 
stitutionibusve principum instituere concessum est, sicuti Iovem 
Tarpetum, Apollinem Didymaeum Mileti, Martem in Gallia, 
Minervam Iliensem, Herculem Gaditanum, Dianam Efesiam, 
Matrem deorum Sipylenen, Nemesim, quae Smyrnae colitur, et 
Caelestem Salinsem Carthigini. Apparently those who violated 
the laws of the sanctuary were liable to condemnation, and their 
property was confiscated for the benefit of the temple’s treasury. 


87. EPISTULA SUFENATIS VERI, LEGATI LYCIAE, 
AD LYCIARCHAM 


(igtp, CHE) 
Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 18; Lafoscade, 105. 
[’Ezi] apyvepéo[s KrXavdiou Mapxiavod|......... Lou|d[nva 
Ov7 |p[os] Tol...... | Ave |idpyne yaipew. ‘Ompapoar ’Aro[)- 


Aw ||viov Sis tod Kadrrddouv kali avros a[o]||Séxouat eri tHe 
/ ec ss \ Vd ” ¢ a > / 
piroTetpiat, iv mpos TO Aa[w]|potatoy EOvos bwov éredetEaTo, 
Sw|pnoduevos avtar Snvdpia TevTakis pv|pia mpos ols mépuct 
uTécynto eis THY KalTaddAaynv TOD vouicuatos Snvapiors || 
TevTaKkes yethiows. Tiv odv mpodnroupé|ynv adtod Swpeav Be- 
Pad emt te Tat aodrev|tov Kai awetaberov eis Tov adel ypdvov 
* \ pe a by cif > / 
ci|vac Kai éml rails ddAdas alpécecw, als émnv|[yetrlaro. 
"Eppada Gat ce evyouat. ’E800n || rpo[...] etSdv OxtrarBpiov. 
See note on no. 80. The governor ratifies the establishment of 
an endowment fund of fifty-five thousand denarii, the income of 
which is to be devoted to an annual distribution to the officials 


[ 408 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


and members of the provincial assembly (Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, 
c. 20). The gift of five thousand denarii, made in the previous year 
for the exchange of money, is interesting. The exchange of local 
and imperial money was a form of taxation (cf. nos. 81, 133), and 
this gift was designed to relieve the people who attended the 
assembly and had to make purchases at the fair held in connection 
therewith (cf. no. 73). It appears, however, that his help had 
not been needed, and this sum is now included in the endowment 


fund. 


88. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(132 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 11, 8. 1, 7282; Dessau, 315. 


Imp. Caesari divi Traiani | Parthici f., divi Nervae nep., | 
Traiano Hadriano Aug. p. m., | tr. p. xvi, cos. 111, p. p., Olympio 
ob || multa beneficia quae viritim | quae publice praestitit, resti-| 
tutori coloniae suae, Troadenses | per legatos M. Servilium Tu- 
tilium | Paulum et L. Vedumnium Aulum. || Tpwadéor. 


A square base found in 1886 at Athens probably on the site of 
the gymnasium Hadriani. Lines 8-9 were added by another hand. 
The colonia Alexandria Troas was founded between 27 and 
12 B.c. (cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 550). This inscription celebrates 
the restoration of the colony by Hadrian. For other inscriptions 
cut at the same time in similar circumstances, cf. CIL. ut, S. 1, 


7281, 7283, and IG. 111, 472-486. 


89. LEX PALMYRENORUM 
(1347. puChry 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 629; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 1056, ll. 1-16. 


[Emi Avtroxpatopos Katcapos, Qed Tpaiavod Map |cot 
viold, Oelod [Nepova viwvod, Tpaiavod ‘ASdpiavotd YeBaacrod, 
Snpapyixns | eEovolias Td Ka’, avtoKpatopos 70 8’, vm ]atov TO 
y, TaTpos TaTpioos, Vrata[v A(ouxiov) Aidiov Kaicapos To 8’ 
II(orAtov) Kourou BarPivov]. | ”Erous nu’, unvds Bavdcxod on’, 


[ 409 ] 


nn 


Io 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Soypua Bovrns. | Ei Bevyéous Bwvvéous tod Aipadvou mpoédpou, 
fal A U / 
"AreEdvdpou tov "AdeEavdpou tod || Didotratopos ypapmpmatéews 
a A / A 
Bovans Kat dyuov, Mariyou ’Odaiods cal ZeBeidou Neca 
3 / Lal , 9 , > / \ ¢ 
apyov|rov, Bours vopipou ayouevns, eynpicOn ta vTotetay- 
a a lal / 
péva. “Ererdn [ev lots marae xpovors | ev TOL TENMVLKOL VOMOL 
a a ¢ lal > ? / P) / \ b 
Treicta TOV VTOTEAY OvK avednuhOn, erpao[ceTtlo dé x 
A lal \ 
auvnbeias, év|ypahomévou tHe prcOedoce. Tov TEeXMVOdVTA THY 
mpakw troveicbar axkorovGws THL vopws Kal THe | cuvnOeiat, 
f \ 4 \ a / / 
acuvéBawev S€ TrEaTAdKIS Tepl TovTOV EnTHaELS yelverO[ aL 
uclra&d tév évrdpwv || mpos Tovs TeX@vas: Seddx9aL, TOS 
éverTt@tas apxovtas kat Sexatrpwtous Staxpeivovtas | Ta m1 
avEerAnupéeva TOL vopor evypdrrat THL evytota picOwce Kal 
uTotaéar éxactwe eldee TO | €x ocuvnbelas TéXos, Kal émrevdav 
KupwOne TOL pLoOovpevor, Evypadhvat weTa TOD TpwToU v6| jou 
oTHAnL ALOivne THe ovane avtixpvs [i lep[ov] Neyouévou ‘PaBa- 
ceipn, é[ me ]uereto0ar 5é Tovs Tuyyalvovtas KaTa KaLtpov apxor- 
Tas Kal Sexatrpwrtous Kal cvvdix[ovs Tov] undeév Tapatpaccen || 
Tov praOovpevor. 


From Palmyra. We omit the Aramaic version recorded on the 
stone, and the register of taxes imposed by the decree, which is 
recorded in both Greek and Aramaic. The customs were usually 
under imperial control (Cagnat, Les impéts indirects chez les 
Romains), but Palmyra, in the midst of a desert, had no other 
revenue except that which she derived from her position as a way- 
station on the trade-route to the Orient. There is no evidence that 
the Romans collected portoria in Syria (Mommsen, E.E. 5, 18). 
This law is proposed by the Palmyran senate which authorizes the 
magistrates and decaproti to draw up the tariff in those particulars 
not specified in the existing law. After their proposed tariff was 
ratified by the firm of publicani which collected the tax, the schedule 
was to be posted in a public place where the traders could refer to 
it in case of a dispute with the collectors. Mylasa in Caria also 
had control of the tax on goods entering that port (CJL. m1, S. 1, 


7151; Dessau, Hermes, 19 (1884), 436 ff; cf. p. 140). 


[ 410 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


90, LEX DE CERTA OLEI PORTIONE 
REI PUBLICAE VENDENDA 
(117-138 p. Chr.) 


IG. 1 and un (editio minor), 1100; de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato 
pubblico, 36. 


Ke, vo. Oe. “Adpsavod. | Of To éXatov yewpyodrTes TO TpiTov | 
KaTapepeTwoar, 7) TO dySoov oi Ta | ‘Immapxov ywpia Ta vd 
Tod dickov || mpabévta KexTnwévot: pova yap é|Ketva TO Sixasov 
ToUTO eye Katage|pérwoav 5é dua Tar dpEacOas cvvKo|[mid%s 
Klara pépos, mpos Novyov Told | cvvKoptl lowévov, Tois édedvails, | 


oitives del] rpovoodcw thls | Snuocias xpeials: droypadbécOo- 
[Causodtiny Gare ] THs cuvkomdys mpo[s | Tods tapias Kali 
TOD Uae OO PEL ua chan des |edovtes vrroypal|dnv: [9] dé 


am[oypad]) éotw peta dpkov | Kal mocov cuveKopicev TO TAY, | 
Kai bre b1a Sovrov Todd 7} atrerev|Oépov Tovde* éav Sé TaANHONE 
Tov | xaprov 6 Seamortns Tod xwpiov, % 6 || yewpyos 7) 0 Kap- 
TwVvns, arroypahé|cOw dé mpos Tos avTovs Kal 6 ém éEalywyie 
TiTpacKwy, Tocov mumpacKkes | Kal Tive Kal mod oppule]? To 
[7 ]Aotov. “O d[é] | arroypadis ywpis m[umpackwr] én é€a-|| 
yoyhl, Kav 0 wherrev He xaltevnvoyas] | tHe worer, oTepécOw 
Tov mpab[évtos]. | “O é yevdeis atroypadas mroimaals] | 7) Tas 
Tept THS cvveomohs [%) Tals mept] | tHs eEaywyhs 7) vaép 
A A \ \ / > , V5 € , Ny 

xw@plov, [0 un Tal|lpa dicxov érpiato un ‘Immapy[evol|y [|v 
/ fy / \ A. ¢ ye 

dydoov KaTeveyxay, o[Tepé|oOw, TO dé Husov o wn |vicas Aap[Ba- 

, id aa pie ae \ > / , 
véto. |"Os & dv er’ éEayo|yiv avatoy[parta | mpinra.....] 
ELPEEL MW. ws. [Peteyacse Chane. tya. a cle tov am[olotep..... Rogtetbe Una 
aoe N AX of Xx / / \ > | 

Ree RE og autos 7 Gr tiva | av EAXnTaL, TWempacKé|tw wev EF ar[o- 
ypa|dis.......7]ns dé respns 70 [pe H | usov cateyéro, ef unto 
dédmxev 7) Nap||Bavéto, TO 5é Hutov ~ctw Snpdcov. | Tpadécbw 
5é Kat o Ewropos, tt éEayer | kal Tocov map ExdaTtov* édv Oé j2) 
atro|yparyrayevos Pwpabhu éexmréwv, otepé|aOw* dav dé éxrA€v- 
cas POdone Kai pnvr||O7t, ypadécOw Kal The watpide adtov vd 
Tov | Sjpov Kdpuot. Tas dé epi tovtar Sdixas | wéypt mev TrevTn- 
KovTa appopéwy 7 Bov|dn pmovn KpewwéTw, Ta Sé vmrép TovUTO 
peta | Tov Syjpov. "Kav b€ Tay é« Tov mroiov Tus || pnvdons, 
émrdvayKes 0 otpaTnyos The EEns | Hwépar Bovanv abpoicadta, et 


[ 411 ] 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


ok, 


60 


65 


79 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


S bmép tovs | mevtnKkovta audopels ein TO wewnvu|mévor, éx- 
Krnotav: Kal 6d0c0m Tat ér€y|EavTe TO Husov. “Hav dé éxxaré- 
ontat Tis 7) || ewe ) Tov avOdTaTov, yerpotoveitw auv|dixous o 
djuos. “Iva 5é amrapaitnta je ta | KaTa TOY KakoupyouVTwY 
émi[rletuila], res|uiis ts TO Snucotov KatadepécOw To édat|or, 
Hrs av év tHe Y@pae He. Ee 8é rote evpop[il|las €Aatov yevo- 
pévns wréov ein TO éx THY | TpiTwY 7) OYSdwV KaTahEepomEvoY THS 
els | Cdov zLo]lv évvauvrov Snpuoctas xpeias, é&éloTtw Tots plev 
yewp|yotow To éXaov % av | 1) pwépos Sevtépay aroypadyv 
Tomnoapé||vous Kal Snudcatov To Te dhethouevov | Tocoy eat 
,++ +0 ol EXNaLavas 7 off] apyv|potapyia[s] od BovrAovTat Trap av- 
Tov NaBetv,| PurAd[TTEW........-. [Eerie einer ns. lorieaia 3 

From Athens. In the first line Dittenberger proposed the re- 
storation Ke(Aever) vo(uos) Oe(od) and dated the document after 
the death of Hadrian. Premerstein proposed xe(badraov) vd(uov) 
Oe(ov) “Adptavod and would date the law in 124-125, the year 
of Hadrian’s first visit to Athens (cf. Weber, Unters. Gesch. Hadr. 
165). Although Athens was a free city, allied to Rome, and free 
to enact her own laws, Hadrian was asked to devise new laws which 
he modelled on those given by Solon and Draco (Hieron., Chr., ab 
Abr. 2137). As Solon is said to have restricted the exportation of 
olives from Attica, it is possible that this document may contain 
one of the clauses of Hadrian’s legislation, although it seems to 
be a separate enactment. The law stipulated that the olive-growers 
must reserve one-third of their supply to be sold to the Athenian 
state at the market price, with the proviso that tenants on the estate 
of Hipparchus, formerly owned by the imperial fiscus, should 
reserve one-eighth only. Failure to declare the amount of oil pro- 
duced, or the amount bought or sold for export, or a false declara- 
tion, led to confiscation. The Athenian senate had jurisdiction over 
cases in which less than fifty amphorae were involved. Where 
greater quantities were in question, the case came before the popular 
assembly. Appeals could be taken to the emperor or to the governor, 
and in such cases the city was represented by advocates elected by 
popular vote. 

The special consideration shown to those on the estate of Hip- 
parchus is noteworthy. Hipparchus was the grandfather of Herodes 


[ 412 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Atticus and his lands had been confiscated by the fiscus because he 
had been suspected of revolutionary designs (Philostratus, Vit. Soph. 
2. I. 2). If these lands had been sold outright, as seems to be 
implied, it is dificult to understand why the purchasers should be 
entitled to such favorable consideration in comparison with other 
landowners in Attica. We suspect, however, that the verb rpadévta 
is used here in the same sense as in the law concerning the disposal 
of the public lands of Thisbe (cf. no. 129 and commentary), and 
that the lands of Hipparchus formed an imperial estate within the 
territory of Attica in spite of the fact that Athens was in possession 
of the status of a czvitas foederata et libera. 

Although the law implied that the city must pay the prevailing 
market price (Il. 58-59), it is difficult to understand why there 
should be any difficulty in securing an adequate supply of oil in 
the open market under such circumstances. It is probable that the 
city fixed a price lower than that prevailing in the export trade, and 
this law virtually imposes a tax upon the olive-growers in so far 
as the price paid by the city for the third of their produce is below 
the current market quotations. 


QI. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI (?) 
AD ATHENIENSES 
(117-138 p. Chr.) 

IG. 11 and ut (editio minor), 1103. 

ng tea oe hes peTpy[sS.....2+2++- [OE THY StoMeAtay........ 
Poy a noel 4 vets s .. Tots] | 5é év Enevoeive adiedow arérecav 
> St be / >’ 3 A b] A 5) ral Ve 
ixOv[wv eivar drav év’Enev]|ceive ev rie ayopas miumpdoKwouw, 
e f / \ b \ 3 / 7 > / 
ws péevni[......lva TO dia TA || eioaya@ryia Gheros eis péya Te 
atravTnon TLovs b€....- ...+]| Kal Tovs Wadw KaTnrEvOVTAS 

A 4 x » > an ? 

memavab[at...... ..+] | BovrAopat 7} évderEw adTav yetverOat 
mplos tlov x[nlpvea ths && “Alpetov mayou Bovrts: tov é 
eloayewv eis Tolds “A]lpeorrayeitas, Tods de | Tetuayv ote xp7) 
maGeiv 7) atroteicar’ Twimpacké|Tw|cay dé wdavta % avTol ot || 
KopLCovTes 7) OL TPATOL TAP aVTOV @vov[ mE |voL* TO Oé Kal TpiTOUS 
@|ynTas yewwopévous TOV avToV @viwv pel talmimpadcKew éTr- 

/ \ / / \ > \ / 2 / 
reiver | Tas Tetuds. Tavtny thy érictoAny otnrne Ly ypawartes 
év Ilespaet | ornoate mpo Tov deiypatos. Evruyxeire. | 


[-413 J 


Io 


IO 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


"Esriperntevovtos THs morews T. “lovdAiov ‘Hpwdzsar[od] 
KodaAvréws. 

From Athens, In this letter there appears to be an interesting 
attempt on the part of the writer of the letter to reduce the high 
cost of living in Athens by suppressing the middleman. Merchandise 
brought into the city must be retailed by the importer, or by the 
first purchaser. Possibly the law dealt only with the importation 
of fish. ‘he arrogance of the fishermen at Athens was proverbial, 
and it is possible that the dealers in the fishmarket had combined 
to compel higher prices; cf. Wilhelm, Fahreshefte d. ést. arch. 
Inst. 12 (1909), 146f. Athens, though a free city, was unable 
to cope with her own problems, and appealed to the emperor (?), 
probably through the curator ret publicae, to devise legislation which 
would prevent speculation and consequent advancement in the 
cost of food supplies (cf. no. 65a). For a list of curatores at Athens, 
cf. R.E. s.v. curator. On the importance of the Areopagus as a 
court in Roman times, cf. Mitteis, Reschsrecht und Volksrecht, 
86, n. 4. . 

92. EDICTUM IMPERATORIS HADRIANI (?) 
DE VECTIGALIBUS 
(117-138 p. Chr.) 


IG. u and ut (editio minor), 1104. 


ate déyovtat TO apyvptov, émiTipscov opiléTwaayr | avTols 
Kata thv THS atre[s|Olas akiav: éLav] d[é] of ma|pado[ Oé]vtes 
elapépe pt Bovrwvrat, [el|ta | vrevOvvoe Ectwoav TPaTov 
bev ExatooTtiaiwv TOKa[V], || ad’ ob Séov ToimoacBat THY elcodov 
ovK éTroinoar|TO, MexplL wNVaV AAdwv SvVo THs TEAEUTALAs aTro-| 
ddcews, weTa 5é TOS pivas TovTOUS ef pévocev | fur) TreLOdpEvoL, 
atrob0cOwaar ot apyvpotapias peta | TOD KNpuKoS Tas UTOOHKaS, 
[you Jrwy avras éEouciay || Woacbas EEnxovta nuepav mpatov 
bev TOV SEd@KOT|wY, EiTa Kab TOV eyyUNTa@V olTLVes UTEevOvVOL 
tav | évdenodr[tw|jv OBEAOTTITETOA NOEITONENAEH- 
TATON | O¢ E€jKovta spwatpav opirovow éxtetoas. 

This inscription from Athens is assigned by Boeckh (CIG. 354) 
to the time of Hadrian. The document appears to be an imperial 
edict regulating the collection of taxes. These were farmed out to 


[ 414 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


contractors who were required to furnish securities for the proper 
fulfilment of their obligations. Those who failed to comply with 
the terms of their contract were fined. In case of refusal to pay the 
fine, interest was charged on the amount due on the defaulted 
payment. If, after two months, the contractor was still recalcitrant, 
the securities must be sold at public auction under the privilege of 
redemption. 


93. SERMO ET EPISTULAE PROCURATORUM 
DE TERRIS VACUIS EXCOLENDIS 
(117-138 p. Chr.) 

Carcopino, AZélanges de Pécole frang. de Rome, 26 (1906), 365— 
481; An. ép. 1907, no. 196; Bruns, 116; Girard, p. 874; Ricco- 
bono, p. 357. 

Colont.. .tuani rogamus, procuratolres, per providentiam ves- Col.1 
tram, quam | zomine Caesaris praestatis, velitis nobis | et utilitatz 
illius consulere, dare no||bzs eos agros qui sunt in paludibus et | in 5 
silvestribus instituendos olivetis | et vineis, lege Manciana con- 
dicione | saltus Neroniani vicini nobis. Cum | ederemus hanc 
petitionem nostram || fundum suprascriptum N|eronzanum | incre- 10 
mentum habitatorum..... | 


(Desunt versus circa octo) 


RUT is te ee iubeas. Sermo procuratorwm im|p(eratoris) Caes(aris) Col. 11 
Hadriani Aug(usti). Quia Caesar n(oster) pro | infatigabili cura sua, 
per quam adsi|due pro humanis utilitatibus excudat, om||nes partes 5 
agrorum, guae tam oleis aut | vineis quam frumentis aptae sunt 
ex|coli iubet, itcirco permissu provzd|entiae eius, potestas fit omnibus 
etia|m eas partes occupandi, quae in cenf||wris elocatis saltus Blan- to 
diani et U|densis et in iis partibus sunt quae ex | saltu Lamiano et 
Domitiano iunctae | Thusdritano sunt nec a conductoribus | exercentur 
cet. 

Fructuum quam coloni ob summam Caes. cle|mentiam is qui loca Col. 
neglecta a conduc|toribus occupaverit, quae da|rz so/ent, tertias partes 
fructuum || dabit; de eis quoq(ue) regionibus qu|ae ex Lamiano et 5 
Domitiano | sa/tu iunctae Tuzritano sunt | tantundem dabit. De 
oleis quas quisgue | aut in scrobibus posuerit aut oleastr||zs inseruerit, 10 
captorum fructuum | nulla pars decem proximis annts exige|tur cet. 


ese 


Col. Iv 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Earinus et Doryphorus Primigenzo | suo salutem. Exemplum 
epistulae scrip|tae nobis a Tutilio Pudente egregio viro | ut notum 
haberes et it quod subiectum est || celeberrimis locis propone. Verri- 
dius | Bassus et Ianuarius Martiali suo salutem. | Si qui agri cessant 
et rudes sunt, s¢ gui si/|vestres aut palustres in eo saltuum trac|tu, 
volentis lege Manciana colere ne prohibeas. 


III, ll. r-2. fructuum...qui, Schulten, from the letters remaining. 


A stone inscribed on all four sides found at Ain-el-Djemala in 
Tunis in 1906. The upper and lower parts of the stone are lacking. 
‘The principal commentaries on it are those of Carcopino, Joc. cit.; 
Mispoulet, Nouv. rev. hist. d. droit fr. et &r. 31 (1907), 5-483 
Schulten, K/io, 7 (1907), 188-212; Carcopino, Kio, 8 (1908), 
154-185. 

The inscription belongs to the time of Hadrian; cf. col. 11, 1. 2. 
Different explanations have been given of the contents of the 
document by different commentators. To follow the analysis of 
Rostowzew (cf. Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 334 ff-), which seems the most 
convincing, of the officials mentioned in the document, Earinus (or 
Carinus) is probably procurator of the sa/tus or regio concerned; 
Doryphorus, his adutor; Verridius Bassus, procurator tractus; Janu- 
arius, hissubordinate; Martialis, perhapsasecretary; Tutilius Pudens 
is one of the predecessors of Verridius Bassus in the office of 
procurator tractus. ‘The document then seems to be made up of the 
following parts: (1) a petition addressed to the procurator tractus 
Carthaginiensis (tuani. . .incrementum hatit.) by the colont of a certain 
saltus; (2) a letter from ‘Tutilius Pudens, a former procurator tractus, 
to Primigenius, of which only the word zubeas is extant. ‘This letter 
Primigenius had neglected to publish; (3) the sermo procuratorum, 
extending through exzgetur cet. The sermo procuratorum recited the 
apposite parts of the general statute, known as the /ex Manciana, 
with the proper adaptation to the sa/tus concerned; (4) a letter of 
the procurator saltus and his assistant to Primigenius, and (5) a 
letter to Martialis. Earinus and Doryphorus speak of sending a 
copy of a letter by Tutilius Pudens and a document appended to it 
(tt quod subiectum est). ‘Vhe appended document is of course no. 3 


(cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 334). The lex Manctana, to which the 
[ 416 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


petitioners refer, was a Flavian statute, drawn up perhaps by a 
legate of Vespasian (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 336). This law was 
modified in some respects by the /ew Hadriana. To the later law, 
however, the petitioners make no reference. In the general statute 
the maxima and minima of the contributions (partes) and the days’ 
work (operae) required of coloni were probably fixed. In the sermo 
procuratorum, within the ranges fixed by the law, the contributions 
and services required of the coloni of the saltus concerned were 
established. This became the /ex sa/tus, and, since it was under the 
protection of the zumen of the emperor, it was inscribed on an altar; 
cf. ara legis Hadrianae (Bruns, 115). By comparing the extant 
portions of the ara /egis Hadrianae with those of our inscription, 
we are able to fill out large lacunae in both documents. In this way 
the long italicized passages in cols. 11 and 111 of this inscription have 
been restored. In their petition the co/oni ask permission to bring 
waste land under cultivation. ‘heir request is granted not only for 
land never before cultivated but also for land which has been out 
of cultivation for ten years, with the further concession, that, for 
a fixed term of years, the tenants shall not be obliged to pay a part 
of the produce as rental (cf. col. m1). Whether the provisions of the 
lex Hadriana, upon which the procurator bases his decision (cf. 
col. 11), applied only to a specified number of imperial domains, to 
all those in Africa, or to imperial domains, wherever situated, is a 
matter of dispute. Probably the regulations applied to Africa only. 
For the organization of a sa/tus, cf. pp. 17 ff. 


94. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(117-138 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 11, 5941; Dessau, 6954. 


L. Aemil. M. f. M. nep. Quirina Rectus domo Roma, qui et 
Karth. | et Sicellitanus et Assotanus et Lacedaemonius et Baste- 
tanus | et Argius, scriba quaestorius, scriba aedilicius, donatus equo 
publ. | ab imp. Caesare Traiano Hadriano Aug., aedilis coloniae 
Karthagi., patronus rei publicae Assotanor. testamento suo |] rei 
pub. Assotan. fieri iussit, epulo annuo adiecto. 


Set up at Asso near Caravaca in Spain. Rectus was a Roman 


AMA [ 417 ] | 27 


Io 


Io 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


citizen and also a citizen of five other municipalities, one in Africa, 
two in Spain and two in Greece (cf. no. 24), a municipal official 
in Carthage and patron of Asso. He probably owed these honors 
to the favor of Hadrian. 


g5. ITITULUS HONORARIUS 
(119-138 p. Chr.) 
GiP<11, 32230; 
Imp. Caesari divi | Traiani Parthici | f. divi Nervae n. | Vraiano 
Hadri||ano Aug., pont. max.,| trib. pot...... cos. | III, p. p.) Imp. 
opt. max. | q. principi restitu|tori munzcipit || Llugonenses d. d. 


Found at Ilugo in Tarraconensis. Whether we should restore 
restitutort, fundatori or conditori Mommsen considers uncertain. 
The importance of the inscription for us lies in the fact that it 
seems to record the elevation by Hadrian of a civitas stipendiarta 
to the position of a municipium. 


96. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE NUNDINIS SALTUS BEGUENSIS 
(138 p. Chr.) 


CIL. vit, 270 = vu, 8. 114513; Bruns, 61; Riccobono, p. 236. 


S.C. de nundinis saltus Beguensis in t(erritorio) | Casensi, de- 
scriptum et recognitum ex libro sen|tentiarum in senatu dictarum 
Kari Iuni Nigri, C. Pompo|ni Camerini cos., in quo scripta erant 
Africani iura et id || quod i(nfra) s(criptum) est. Idibus Oct.... 
In comitio in curia Iu/(za) | adfuerunt Q. Gargilius Q. f. Antiq(u)us, 
TieCl: Ti... Pals Quartinus, | C:-Oppius (GC. of V el Severus, 
C. Herennius C. f. Pa/. Caecilianus, M. Iu/. | M. f. Quir. Clarus, 
P. Cassius P. f. Cla. Dexter q(uaestor), P. Nonius M. f. Ouf. 
Mac|rinus q. In senatu fuerunt c. || 

S.C. per discessionem factum. Quod P. Cassius Se|cundus, P. 
Delphius Peregrinus Aleius Alennius Maxi|mus Curtius Valerianus 
Proculus M. Nonius Mucianus | coss. verba fecerunt de desiderio 
amicorum Lucili Afrilcani c. v., qui petunt: ut ei permittatur in 
provincia Afric(a), regione || Beguensi, territorio Musulamiorum, 
ad Casas, nundinas | mr nonas Novemb. et xr k. Dec., ex eo 
omnibus mensibus mir non. | et xir k. sui cuiusq(ue) mensis in- 
stituere habere, quid fieri | placeret, 


[ 418 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


de ea re ita censuerunt: permittendum Lu|cilio Africano, c. v., 
in provincia Afric(a), regione Beguensi, || territorio Musula- 
miorum, ad Casas, nundinas 111 non. | Novemb. et xu k. De- 
cembr. et ex eo omnibus mensibus 1111 non. et xz k. | sui cuiusq(ue) 
mensis instituere et habere, eoque vicinis | advenisq(ue) nundinandi 
dumtaxat causa coire conve|nire sine iniuria et incommodo cuius- 
quam liceat. || 

Actum idibus Octobr. P. Cassio Secundo, M. Nonio Muciano, | 
Eodem exemplo de eadem re duae tabellae signatae sunt. | Signatores: 
T. Fl(avi) Comini scrib(ae), C. [uli Fortunati scrib(ae), | M. Caesi 
Helvi Euhelpisti, QO. Metili Onesimi, C. Iuli Perilblepti, L. 
Verati Phile(rotis), I. Fl(avii) Crescentis. 


Two stones, upon each of which the entire inscription was cut, 
were found in 1860 and 1879 respectively in Henschir Begar in 
Tunis. For a commentary on the inscription, cf. E.£. 2, 271 ff. 
‘The inscriptions were perhaps cut in the third or fourth century. 
Permission to establish markets was granted sometimes by the senate 
(cf. Plin. Epp. 5. 4; Suet. Claud. 12) and sometimes by the emperor 
(cf. Dig. 50. 11. 1). The “ber sententiarum in senatu dictarum, 
from which this document was copied, is known more commonly 
as the acta senatus (e.g. Suet. Iu/. 20; Aug. 5. 36) or acta patrum 
(Tac. Ann. 5. 4) or commentarit senatus (Lac. Ann. 15. 74). On 
the senatorial archives cf. p. 233, n. 7. It is interesting to notice 
that parliamentary forms are still followed rather strictly, even in 
the manner of voting, of requiring a quorum, and of appointing 
a committee to draft the motion. 


97. EPISTULA CORNELI PROCULI, LEGATI LYCIAE, 
AD COMMUNE LYCIORUM 


(139 p. Chr.) 

Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 28; Lafoscade, 108. 

"Ent apxvepéos “Idcov[os t]obv Netxootparov, | Tavnpolv] 
xa’, [Kopynr vos poxdos, | rpecBevtis avtia[tpatnyos a]vto- 
Kpatopos, ToL Kow[ ae Avetwv xaiper|y. Kai | rapev é[yvoxa, 
OTL as peta TrAELaTHS (2)] || c7rovdA[s mp ]los "Ompapoar [’ATroaA- 
AJoviov | dis told] Kaddsddov cal d[tre avrérlatrov | Temas 


[ 419 ] 27-2 


20 


25 


Io 


15 


Io 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


ebndicacbe, TavTas viv Kal hvixa | Eertuv arrodobvat Bovrea be, 
TovTO cur|ywpnoavTos TOD peyloTov TaVTwY avTo||KPaTopos, Os 
EavOlous avixe tTHhv érrixkrnow | THY avTiKpUS TOUTMY YyEvomLevnD. 
Kat éuol | 8& done? cal Orpapuoas ravtwy evexev a|Evos érrau- 
veia Oat Kai TemdcOar mpds twov, | Kal PedoTELpos wY Kal Trept 
Tacav TOAW ws || TaTpida éaTrovdakws Kal Tots idtots ws KoL-| 
vols ypwmevos’ éTaw@ S€é Kal Uuas ad|tovs Tors Tas TELmas 
duddvTas 6Tt ac|....... (septem versus maxime mutili; in fine :) 
"Eppdcbat [tpas Bolvaro|[war. “Ed]o@n mpo ta’ Ka(ravdor) 
"O[kro |vB8p[iwr] | év Lardposs. 

See note on no. 80. In a.p. 137 the governor had vetoed the 
proposal of the provincial assembly to confer unusual honors on 
Opramoas (Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 24, 26). In the following 
year (c. 26) the Xanthians appealed to the emperor, and the pro- 
vincial assembly supported their action by passing a decree and 
sending an embassy to Rome. From the document which we have 
printed above, we learn that the emperor reversed the action of 
the governor in 137, and instructed the present governor to inform 
the assembly of his consent to grant the desired honors. 


98. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE L. VENULEI 
APRONIANI AD EPHESIOS 


(ca. 138-139 p. Chr.) 

Lafoscade, 94. 

OvevovaAmjios ‘Arpwvavoes avOvTato[s] | “Edeciwv dpyovor, 
Bova, Syums yaipelw]. | “Act cat wadrov émideixvvcbe THv 
mplos Tov] | méysotov avtoxp[d|ropa uav [A]iA[cov] || "Av- 
tovetvov LeBlacrov et[céBecav | maone Te (2?) yvl@pne Tis 
AauT[potarnys | worews bulov Kal vdv >ydiod[pevor ev | Tabs 
émripavelotdtass nuetv Kal aiwr[iows] | avto[d yeve]OALacs Hépacs 
kat Géas 7[pepa@r] || wévte émritedety kal Siavopny Tots | TroAe- 
Tals €K TOV Kadovpévwv eis Tas | Bucias ExdoTw. SnvdpLov 
diddvar. Kal | tadta pev vpetv dp0ds Kal Kadads Sorrep | (i) 
avTos elonynodpevos Etvx[oly || vevouobeTncOw. "Eppaabar 
bpas evyopar. 

An edict of Trajan had forbidden donationes from the municipal 
treasury to citizens (Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 110), but in this document 


[ 420 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


from Ephesus we see that, in the age of the Antonines, the town 
council proposed a distribution of a denarius to each citizen present 
at the sacrifices in honor of the emperor on his birthday, if his name 
was on the roll of invited guests. Endowments for such distributions 
were common in antiquity (Laum, S¢tiftungen, 1, 103 ff. cf. nos. 
69, 71), but we seldom find record of a direct distribution of 
municipal funds as proposed at Ephesus. The approval of the 
governor was required, and we infer from his answer that he had 
the right to propose legislation in the municipal council, at least 
in matters dealing with the finances of the city. 


99. EPISTULA CORNELI PROCULI, LEGATI LYCIAE, 
AD SCRIBAM PUBLICUM MYRORUM 
(140 p. Chr.) 

Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 34; Lafoscade, 110. 

Kopyjdwos Ilpoxdos, | mpecBevtns avti|otpatnyos adv[to- 
Kpa]|to[pos], “lovrtiws Kalzera]||Netvws [M]upéwr ypaypal| ret 
yaipew. [O]is 7 Bov|dy Kal o Shwos ovopalow érelt]unoev 
‘Orpapo|av “ArrodN@viov dis || Tob Kaddrddov, Tod|Tows Kayo 
tovtov | mpocayopevecOar | cuvywpa, ef wn TodT eo]| tu b7e- 
vavtiov % Tots || vowoss » tots éeo[s]v | [Tots malp tpuel?]p. 
TEppdc]|Oat ce edxopar. “Avayé|ypartas él apyi(epéas) | 
[TIov Juydpy[ov ]. 

Cf. no. 80. The city of Myra proposed to confer certain honors 
on Opramoas, but first asked the provincial legate if he would 
sanction their decree. He replied that the city could do so, if their 
act was not contrary to their laws or customs. In submitting their 
proposal to the legate, the municipal authorities were probably 
animated by motives of vanity, but in this way they invited the 
interference of the imperial authorities in local affairs (cf. nos. 71, 
114). To some extent the powers of cities were limited by the 
laws of the commissioners or governor 1n organizing the province. 
Edicts were also issued by various emperors regulating the internal 
affairs of the municipalities. For example, Trajan issued an edict 
forbidding the payment of money from municipal treasuries to 
private individuals as gifts (Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 110). ‘Treaties 


made between Rome and various cities also contained clauses which 


[ 421 ] 


Io 


T5 


IO 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


gave Romans special privileges and apparently restricted the freedom 
of the city in giving similar rights to other aliens (cf. IG. vi1, 20 
(Tanagra) [Seddc00ar].. Kal r[add]a wavt[a]...[wrnv et twa 
ddXws | tpootét[axrar nuiv ev Tats o luv[OjKars Tails yevouévats 


mpos | ‘Pwpaiouvs: Dio Chrys. 41, 103 cf. no. 19). 


100. EPISTULA ANTONINI PII AD EPHESIOS 
(140-144 p. Chr.) 

Lafoscade, 51; Ditt. Sy//.3 849. 

Avtoxp[dtap Kaicap, Qeod ‘AS |ptavod | vids, Geo[d Tpaiavod 
Tlap@cxod vier os, | Geod Nep[ova éxyovos, Tiros AiAuos “Adpt]- 
avos | ’Avtaveivlos YeBacrtes, apyeepevs pé |ytoros, || Snuapxexh[s 
éEovcias TO.., avToxpatwp TO P'], Urratos | To y', maTp Tal Tpl- 
50s, Edeciwy tots [apyovor kat tH] Bourne | [kat Tas OH |uwe 
yaiplew]. | Iepyaunvolds amede|Edunv év tots [pos tpas 
yledupacw | xpnoapévolus tolis ovoulalouw ots eyo ypnoOar 
THv Tow || THv Hwerépav [arr led[n lvdunv. Oiwas dé cai Suvpvai- 
ous kata | Tvynv tapad[edlourévar TadtTa év TO rept THS 
cuvOuatas | Wndicpats, ToU Aowtrod O€é ExovTas evyv@morHceLy, 
éav | kal tpets ev Tois mpos avTovs ypdupacwy Ov [m7 lpoonKer | 
TpOTOY Kal KEKpLTAaL THS TOAEWS avTOV [haivyna O |e weuvy||[u ]évor. 
To Wydiopa ereprpev Lovarrixsos lov[ ra ]vo[s érit |pomos pov. | 
EKorvyeite. | [Td] dé wydiopa éroinaev ypappatevor Id. Odndxos 
’Av[ rove |ivo[s ]. 

From Ephesus. This letter illustrates the rivalry between Greek 
cities in Asia Minor for preeminence which was characteristic at 
this period (Cassius Dio, 52. 37. 10; Dio Chrys. 34. 48). The 
emperor had determined the proper rank and titles for the three 
cities, Ephesus, Smyrna, and Pergamum. Neither Smyrna nor 
Ephesus accepted his decision, and in their communications to each 
other had neglected to use the proper titles of honor. The Ephesians 
complained to the emperor, and in his reply he attempts to allay 
their wrath with a mild rebuke, suggesting that they also use the 
proper titles of honor in addressing Smyrna. This dispute raged 
again some years later, and was once more referred to the emperor 
(Aristides, rept owovoias tats toXecww; cf. Chapot, La prov. rom 


proc. d Asie, 144 f.; Ditt. Sy//.3 849, n. 2). 
[ 422 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


IOI. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS ANTONINI PII AD EPHESIOS 
(145 p. Chr.) 

Lafoscade, 543; Ditt. Sy//.3 850; L.B.W. 3, 491. 

[Avtroxpatwlp Kaio[a]p, Oefod *Ad]pifavo]é | [vics, Oeod 
Tpai|avo[d Iap@ |exo[d viw vos, | [Peod Nepotva é]xyov[os, Tiros] 
Aiduo[s “Adpslavos | [Avtwvetvos LeBaloro[s, apxveped]s plé- 
yiatos, dn |uapl||[ye]x[fs eEovcias] 7o 7’, aldvtoxpadtwp ro B’, 
tra[t]os [70 8, ra]|tip m[atpisos, “Edecijav trois [dp }yovar 
cat t[H] Bovrn cat | [to Syuw x Jaipelev. T]yv pirorepiar av 
dirotipletras | mpos bulas O[dydio]s ’"Avtwveivos éuabov ovy 
otta[s] é« | Tov dueTépaly ypayludtav ws éx Trav [éx]eivou: 
Bovropellvos yap map éwod Tvyetv BonOetas [eis TO]y Kocpov 
Tav | Epywv, ov vpelv érnvyerAaTto, éd7d[woev Ooa Kali HrALKa 
oi|Kosounpata tpoatiOnow TH mode, AN’ Uw lets of dx] dp|Oas 
amodéyerGe avTovs Kayo Kai or[vexopnoa alvTals do]|a n77- 
carlo], kal amredeEduny Ori [ov] Tov [cvrvyOy Tay Tro||XevTEVO- 
pévav TpoTrov, of tod [maplayphula evdsoximlety yxal[p]uv els 
Béals xlat dvavopas Kal ta To[v ayovov Oduata Sarav]alce | 
TH |v pu[roripliav, ara Ou’ ob pos TO [wéAXOV EArriber o Jeuvol- 
[répav troun |oewy THY TOALY TpOnp| nTaL. Ta ypadupara ere |uwer | 
[KX. “lov ]Asavos 0 Kpdtiotos avOv[matos. Evtuyeire. 

From Ephesus. ‘This letter reveals the undercurrents of municipal 
life at this period. Vedius Antoninus had secured assistance from 
the emperor in building the Odeum at Ephesus, and had contributed 
generously from his own purse. ‘he emperor rebukes the city for 
their lukewarmness in giving honor to Vedius because he had 
spent his wealth in an enduring monument instead of giving games 


or distributing doles to the citizens. (Cf. Hicks, .B.MZ. 3, 492, 
493-) 


102. EPISTULA RUPILI SEVERI, LEGATI LYCIAE, 
AD LYCIARCHAM 
(150 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 453 Lafoscade, 114. 


‘Povridwos Seouvn[plos “Av[S]poBiwr Avecapyne xaitpe[er. 
’Exre]l 4 xpaltict[n] Tod E@vous Bovdn éreBonaarto To Whdicpa 
Si[ay]paldyvac vrép “Orrpapoa “AmoAXwviov Tpds TOV péyLaToV 


[ 423 ] 


Ll 


10) 


IO 
15 


II 


III 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 
ai[tlo|kparopa, Stvacau trovetv 6 BovrovTat. "Eppacbai ce 
evyou[ ac]. 

Cf. no. 80. The provincial assembly of Lycia requests permission 


of the governor to send a copy of an honorary decree to the emperor. 
The lyciarch is given authority to carry out the wish of the assembly. 


103. TITULUS OPERIS PUBLICI 
(re2paChiy) 

An. ép. 1904, no. 21. 

Imp. Caesar | T. Aelius Hadrianus | Antoninus Aug. Pius | pont. 
max. tribu\|nicia potestate Xv cos. 1111 | viam per Alpiis | Numidicas, 
ve|tustate inter|ruptam, ponti||dus denuo fac|tzs, paludibus | sic- 
catis, labibus | confirmatis, | restituit, || curante M. Valerio | 
Etrusco leg. suo | pr. pr. 


For similar inscriptions, cf. nos. 31 and 72. 


104. TRES EPISTULAE ANTONINI PII AD 
CORONENSES ET THISBENSES 


(140-155 p. Chr.) 

TGPVIN2570. 

pay orae dt]|Kacov, omroTe vyets ovK [€]rreiPecOe Tols KpiOciowy, 
ANNA EionvErTe eis THY Exeivov yowpaly], | Kaxeivous (€)is TO pr) 
mep[ulopav vuds véuovtas tpétecOat. Ilocov dé éotw TO dde- 
NopL[e]|vov Tédos 7) Tiva eicly A KaTecyHKacw buav Kopwveis 
évéyupa, Aptat@vupos || 0 avTos Kpuvet. Evtuyeire. 

Avtoxpatwp Kaicap, Qeod ‘Adpiavod vids, Geod Tpaiavod 
Tlap61| Kod viwves, Geod Nepova éxyovos, Tiros AtAtos ‘ASpiavos 
"Avteveivos LeBacros, apxvepeds péytoTtos, | Snuapyixns é£ov- 
cias 70’, Uratos y', TaTip TaTpidos, Kopwvréwy trois dpyoucs 
Kat THL Boudhe kal Tat SH|uae yalpew. Kat tod Oe0d ratpés 
Mou OiKalws wenvnpévot Kal THs éuhs apyns KaTA TO Tpoah«or || 
erga Onwevor Kai UTép TOD viod wou TpoOdpws cuvnddpevor Tpé- 
Tmovta “EXAnow avOpe@rrots rovei|te. "EmpéoBevev Anpuntptos 
Avovuciou, dt TO €pdd.ov S007Ta, ef un Tpotka bTécyxeTO. Edrv- 
yelre. 

Avtoxpatwp Kaicap, God “Ad[pslavod vids, Ge0d Tpaiavod 
Ilap@tKod viwvos, Peov Nepova éxyovos, Ti|tos AiAzos ‘ASpravds 


[ 424 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


"Avtar[ellvos LeBactos, apyrepeds péeyratos, Snuapyixns éEov- 
atlas TO un’, avto|xpatwp To 8’, Uratos TO 8, mathp Tatpisos, 
Kopwvéwy tots dpyovot Kal THE Bovdne Kal TAL OHjpws yat| perv. 
Tis atoddcews Hv é[rjouncdunv petaéd tuadv Kal Orc Béwr 
atoypapov tmety émevwa, é|lréatetAa O€ kal Meortpiws Aps- 5 
o[t]wvivpos amouetpnoa: Ta TAEOpa Orc Bedow, ad mpocétrakev 
autots 0 | Geds matHnp pov mapadobAl vat], THs dé &EwOev yopas 
el Tiva Ora Pets émuivéworev TreiOovtes bas, | Soooveory pev vowtov 
TéeALos, av] dé cal amobddaw, bcov av brép Tov ypovov Tod 
TaperOovtos ogfet]|Newy avTovs KplOns, Snrove[te] dpels Ta 
évéyupa avtois atrodwaete. EmpécBevov Aidwos TAvKo[v] | Kat 
Avoviiatos Atovucodapor, [ois To] épodvov S00nT aw, ef pur) TpotKa 
uTéaynvTat. Evruyeire. 

From Coronea. The people of Thisbe had been encroaching on 
the territory of Coronea. The dispute had been referred to Hadrian 
and a decision rendered, but the aggressions continued. Antoninus 
appointed Aristonymus to survey the land, ordering both Thisbans 
and Coroneans to pay the taxes to the respective cities to which 
the disputed lands might be awarded. 


105. EDICTUM PROCONSULIS ASIAE DE FESTIS 
DIEBUS EPHESIORUM 
(ca. 160 p. Chr.) 


I.B.M, 482; CIG. 2954; Ditt. Sy//.3 867. 


[..[Lo]mirrcos Kapos [léda[v] | avOd7ratos Neyer. | ["E]uadov é« 

lal yA > > \ / c \ nm vs 
Tov TeupOértos [eis €]| we Wydiopatos vio THS Naptrpot[a]||tns 5 
>, / A \ \ b] A fi > / 
Edeciwy Bovrns tovs mpo éulov] | kpatictous avOurdrovs 
e \ 7 \ e / lal He lal 9 
ie[pas] | vopicas ras ijuépas tis [ra]vy[ydpews | t]Ov ’Aprfe- 
puciwv] Kal TovTo dvaTtal|ypats SednrwKévar’ Oey avayxail|oy 10 
e / \ > \ > / y \ > / A A 
nynoadpny Kat avTos amoBré|Trwv eis Te THY EVaéBELav THs Beod | 
Kal eis THY THS NaptrpoTarns ‘Ede|ociwy Torews Teyunv havepov 
mrot|noas Siatdypate eoecOat Tas Hpépas || TavTas iepas Kal TAS 15 
ém avtais éxe|yerpias pvraxOncecOar: mpoeata|tos THs Tavy- 
yvpews | Titov Aidtov Mapxcavod I picxov | tot aywvobérov, 
¢ lal bn eta / > 5 \ 5 / \ / an 
bod Airiov || L[picxov, avdpos doxiuwtatov Kai | rmdons TeLpns 20 
Kal amTodoyns akiov. 


[42.500] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


From Ephesus. The governor of Asia had, apparently, given 
offence to the citizens of this city by transacting public business— 
possibly holding court—on days sacred to Diana. The Ephesians 
lodged a protest, citing the edicts of former governors regarding 
their holy days. The second part of the inscription, omitted here, 
contains a decree of the city making the whole of the month 
Artemision sacred to the goddess. 


106. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE CYZICENIS 
(138-160 p. Chr.) 
CIL. m1, S. 7060; E.F. 3, 156; Dessau, 7190; Bruns, 62; 
Riccobono, p. 237. 


S.C. de postulatione Kyzicenor. ex Asia, | qui dicunt ut corpus 
quod appellatur ne|on et habent in civitate sua auctoritate | am- 


5 plissimi ordinis confirmetur. Scri||bendo adfuerunt M. Aelius imp. 


T5 


Titi Aeli | Hadriani Antonini f. Pap. Aurelius Velrus,....s M. f. 
Gal. Verus, M. Hosidius | M. f A...Geta, M. Annius M. f. 
Gal. Libo, Q. | Pompezus Q. f. Hor. Bassianus, L. Fl. L. f. || 
Quir. Iulianus, L. Gellius L. f. Ter. Severus, | q(uaestores). Sen- 
tentia dicta ab Appio Gallo | cos. desig. relatione mir concedente | 
imp. Caesare Tito Aelio Hadriano An|tonzmo Aug. Pio. . 1111 re- 
latione sua || .. .. Kyzicenos ex Asia | ....qguos neos appellant.... 


A stone tablet found in 1876 on the site of Cyzicus, now in the 
British Museum. Cyzicus was a civitas Libera (cf. Chapot, La prov. 
rom. proc. d’ Asie, 115) in the senatorial province of Asia. As 
Kornemann has shown (R.E. 4, 408 ff:), the imperial policy in 
the matter of associations was determined by the /ex Iulia of 
Augustus (cf. CYL. v1, 2193). Under this law only useful organiza- 
tions were allowed, and a new association must secure the consent 
of the senate and the approval of the emperor. Under the early 
empire the senate took action even on requests from cities in 
imperial provinces (cf. CIL. v, 7881), but gradually its competence 
was restricted to Italy and the senatorial provinces, as in this case, 
and in the course of time, even in senatorial provinces, the consent 
of the emperor was the determining factor. In the cities of the 
East particularly the central government was chary of allowing the 


[ 426 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


formation of clubs, because of their tendency to develop into political 
organizations (cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trait. 33, 34). On the danger 
attending the formation of corpora neon (= iuvenum), Mommsen 
cites Dig. 48. 19. 28, 3, from the third century, solent quidam, 
qui volgo se tuvenes appellant, in quibusdam civitatibus turbulentis 
se adclamationibus popularium accommodare. ‘The emperor had the 
right to present the first four motions at a meeting of the senate, 
but in this case he conceded his right to the fourth motion (cf. 1. 12) 
to the consul designatus (cf. Mommsen, St. R. 2, 898, n. 4). The 
words sententia dicta show that the stone gives an extract from the 
Acta Senatus rather than the S.C. itself. After 11 B.c. the Acta 
Senatus were in charge of the quaestors. 


107. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(138-161 p. Chr.) 


CIL. x11, 594; Dessau, 6988. 


Pagani pagi Lucreti, qui sunt fini|bus Arelatensium loco Gargario, 
QO. Cor. | Marcelli lib. Zosimo mu11vir Aug. col. Tul. | Paterna 
Arelate ob honorem eius, qui notum (szc) fecit || inturiam nostram 
omnium saecu/orum sacra|tissimo principi T. Aelio Antonino Pzo, 
..r© Romae | misit per multos annos ad praesides provinczae per- 
se|cutus est iniuriam nostram suis inpendizs et ob hoc | donavit nobis 
inpendia quae fecit, ut omnium saecu||lorum sacratissim1 principis 
imp. Caes. Antonini Aug. Pi | beneficia durarent permanerentque 
quibus frueremur | ....et balineo gratuito quod ablatum erat 
paganis | pag? Lucretz, quod usi fuerant amplius annis xxxx. 


Found at St Jean de Garguier near Massilia. The pagus Lucretius 
was an oppidum attributum, which had probably been taken from 
Massilia and given to Arelate, because of the resistance which 
Massilia offered to Caesar in 49 B.c., cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 
263 f.; Herzog, Gallia Narbonensis, 171 and no. 358. On oppida 
attributa and their disputes with their suzerain states, cf. nos. 10 
and 49; pp. 10 ff, 138 ff In ll. 6-7 Hirschfeld would read patienter 


Romae mansit. 


[ 427 ] 


Io 


Io 


I5 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


108. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS ANTONINI AD MINOETAS 
(138-161 p. Chr.) 


IG. xu, 7, 242; Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1010. 


[Mewanrav thu Bov]|Ane wal [rae Syyor yatpew]..... | 
TUNN@Y 5 Se ad ote [riv wmetépay mo]|Auw: Kal yap a..... lov 
émrihavels..... mpos Tov ‘Pw]|yaiwmy Shwov........ | dé THis 
TPOS TOV.....6% | edvolas, wariota [8 mpds Tov Tatépa 
‘ASpsavov] | Oedv YeRa(c)rov, Os .....-.++5- || Scat peiyras 
Tap wvpeltvy TOAAM@Y ......-- ayabav] | Kat diravépwrev 
One TE |ra: bev kal rdt Wydic[pate Tau bwerépar évé]|- 
TUXov Hdéws, Kal Tolis map’ buadV TperBevTais] | Ocomoprrar 
SAVOKYOIU |e eee | otpatas éypnuatica: [dia Tadta ovv 


ipiv érev]|Oepiav cat avtovomilav Kal atérevav, caOws] | Tapa 
la / ’ / > / b] 7 

Tav mpocOev alvtoxpatopav édaPel|te, ¢BeBaiwoa, eT.... 
From Minoa in the island Amorgus. The emperor, presumably 

Antoninus Pius, ratifies the gift of freedom, independence, and 

immunity, which the city had received from former emperors. 

The visit of Hadrian to the islands in the Aegean was made in 


123 (Weber, Unters. Gesch. Hadr. 142 ff.). Cf. nos. 40, 75. 


109. EPISTULA PRAEFECTORUM PRAETORIO 
(168-172 p. Chr.) 


CIL, 1x, 2438; Bruns, 714; Riccobono, p. 260. 


(1) Bassaeus Rufus et Macrinzus Vindex mag] (istratibus) 
Saepinat(ibus) salutem. | 

Exemplum epistulae scriptae nobis a Cosmo Aug(usti) lib(erto) | 
a rationibus cum his quae’ iuncta erant subiecimus, et admonem|lus 
abstineatis iniuris faciendis conductoribus gregum oviarico|rum cum 
magna fisci iniuria, ne necesse sit recognosci de hoc | et in factum, 
si ita res fuerit, vindicari. | 

(2) Cosmi Aug(usti) lib(erti) a rationibus scriptae ad Basseum 
Rufum et ad | Macrintum Vindic(em) pr(aefectos) pr(aetorio) 
e(minentissimos) v(iros).—Exemplum epistul(ae) scriptae mihi || a 
Septimiano colliberto et adiutore meo subieci, et peto tanti | faciatis 


[ 428 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


scribere mag(istratibus) Saepin(atibus) et Bovian(ensibus), uti de- 
sinant iniuriam | conductoribus gregum oviaricorum qui sunt sub 
cura mea facere, | ut beveficio vestro ratio fisci indemnis sit. 

(3) Script(ae) a Septimiano ad Co|smum.—Cum conductores 
gregum oviaricorum, qui sunt sub cura tua, in re presenti || subinde 
mihi quererentur per itinera callium frequenter iniuriam | se accipere 
a stationaris et mag(istratibus) Saepino et Boviano eo, quod in 
tramsitu | iumenta et pastores, quos conductos habent retineant di- 
centes fugitivos esse et | iumenta abactia habere et sub hac specie 
oves quoque dominicae | szbz pereant in illo tumultu: necesse habe- 
bamus etiam et etiam scribere, quietius ag||erent, ne res dominica 
detrimentum pateretur; et cum in eadem contumacia | perseverent, 
dicentes non curaturos se neque meas litteras neque si tu eis | 


scripserzs haut fieri rem, rogo, domine, si tibi videbitur, indices. 


Basseo Rufo | et Macrinzo Vindici pr(aefectis) pr(aetorio) e(mi- 
nentissimis) v(iris), ut epistulas emittant ad eosdem mag(istratus) 
et statilonarios........¢andiu temere (?) zrritum (?) factum est. 


Found on a stone at Saepinum. The cursus honorum of M. Bas- 
saeus Rufus is given in CYL. vi, 1599 (= Dessau, 1326). He was 
probably prefect of Egypt from 166 to 168 (cf. v. Rohden in R.E. 
3, 103 f.; Meyer, Hermes, 32, (1897), 226). Subsequently he was 
made praetorian prefect. M. Macrinius Vindex was killed in 172 
probably (cf. Prosop. 2, p. 313). Their joint incumbency of the 
praetorian prefecture therefore probably fell between 168 and 172. 
The situation which calls forth this letter is clear. The officials 
of Saepinum and Bovianum have illtreated the keepers of the 
imperial herds and wrongfully taken some of their animals. The 
attention of Cosmus, a rationibus, is called to this state of things 
by his adiutor, Septimianus, in a letter (Il. 10-24). Cosmus sends 
this letter with a brief superscription of his own (ll. 8-10) to the 


praetorian prefects, who in turn prefix a warning (ll. 1-7) to the 


document and send it to the magistrates of Saepinum. Our interest 
in the document lies primarily in the fact that it deals with a quarrel 
between municipal magistrates and imperial employees, and shows 
how such a difficulty was settled. The prefects take the action which 
they do in this case not as fiscal officers, but as officials charged with 
the maintenance of order in Italy, and this is one of the earliest 


[ 429 ] 


15 


IO 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


known instances of the exercise by the praetorian prefect of this 
function; cf. Mommsen, St. R. 2, 969, 1120. 

The stationarii (|. 16) are in this case of course members, not of 
the imperial, but of the municipal police force; cf. Lécrivain, Duct. 
Dar. 4, 1469. For the functions of the scrintum a rationibus, cf. 
pp. 240 ff. For its organization, cf. Hirschfeld, 31 ff On the 
imperial domains, cf. pp. 17 ff. 


110. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE SUMPTIBUS LUDORUM 
GLADIATORUM MINUENDIS 
(176-177 p. Chr.) 


CIL. u, S. 6278; Dessau, 5163; Bruns, 63; Riccobono, p. 238. 


....tantam illam pestem nulla medicina sanari posse. Nec 
poterat: verum nostri principes quibus omne studium est quanto 
lilbet morbo salutem publicam mersam et enectam refovere et 
integrae valuetudini reddere, in primis anima adverterunt quae | 
causa illi morbo vires daret, unde foeda et inlicita vectigalia ius 
haberent, quis auctor et patronus esset usurpandis quasi | legitimis, 
quae omnibus legibus et divinis et humanis prohibentur. || 

Fiscus dicebatur: fiscus non sibi, set qui lanienae aliorum prae- 
texeretur, tertia vel quarta parte ad licentiam foedae rapinae invi|ta- 
tus. Itaque fiscum removerunt a tota harena. Quid enim Marci 
Antonini et Luci Commodi cavendum fisco cum hare|na? Omnis 
pecunia horum principum pura est, nulla cruoris humani adspergine 
contaminata, nullis sordibus foedi quae|stus inquinata, et quae tam 
sanctae paratur quam insumitur. Itaque facessat sive illut ducen- 
tiens annuum seu trecenties | est; satis amplum patrzmonium imperio 
paratis ex parsimonia vestra. Quin etiam ex reliquis lanistarum, quae 
(sestertium) quingenties sul|pra sunt, pars lanistis condonetur. Ob 
quae, oro vos, merita? Nulla sane, inquiunt, merita, set prohibiti 
talibus grassaturis sola|cium ferant et in posterum tanto pretio in- 
vitentur ad opsequium humanitatis. | 

O magni impp., qui scitis altius fundari remedia, quae etiam malis 
consulunt, qui se etiam necessarios fecerint! Et iam fructus tan|tae 
vestrae providentiae emergzt. Legebatur etiam nunc apud nos 
oratio; sed ubi rumore delatum est questus lanistarum recisos, fis|cum 


[ 430 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


omnem illam pecuniam quasi contaminatam reliquisse, statim sacer- 
dotes fidelissimarum Galliarum vestrarum || concursare, gaudere, 
inter se loqui. | 

Erat aliquis, qui deploraverat fortunas suas creatus sacerdos, qui 
auxilium sibi in provocatione ad principes facta constituerat. Sed | 
ibidem ipse primus et de consilio amicorum: quid mihi iam cum 
appellatione? Omne onus, quod patrimonium meum opprimebat, 
sanc|tissimi impp. remiserunt; iam sacerdos esse et cupio et opto 
et, editionem muneris quam olim detestabamur, amplector. | 

Itaque gratiae appellationis non solum ab illo, verum et a ceteris 
petitae; et quanto plures petentur! Iam hoc genus causarum di- 
versam formam || habebit, ut appellet qui non sunt creati sacerdotes, 
immo populus. | 

Quae igitur tantis tam salutarlum rerum consilis vestris alia 
prima esse sententia potest, quam ut, quod singuli sentiunt, quod 
universi | de pectore intimo clamanf, ego censeam? | 

Censeo igitur in primis agendas maximis impp. gratias, qui salu- 
taribus remedis, fisci ratione post habita, labentem civitatium statum 
et prae|cipitantes iam in ruinas principalium virorum fortunas 
restituerunt: tanto quidem magnificentius, quod, cum excusatum 
esset reti||nerent quae ali instituissent et quae longa consuetudo con- 
firmasset, tamen olli peraeque nequaquam sectae suae congruere 
arbitra|ti sunt male instituta servare et quae turpiter servanda essent 
instituere. | 

Quamquam autem non nulli arbitrentur de omnibus, quae ad 
nos maximi principes rettulerunt, una et succincta sententia cen- 
sendum, | tamen, si vos probatis, singula specialiter persequar, verbis 
ipsis ex oratione sanctissima ad lucem sententiae translatis, ne qua 
ex parte pravis in|terpretationibus sit locus. 

Itaque censeo, uti munera, quae assiforana appellantur, in sua 
forma manegnt nec egrediantur sump||tu (sestertium) xxx (milia). 
Qui autem supra (sestertium) xxx (milia) ad Lx (milia) usque munus 
edent, is gladiatores tripertito praebeantur numero pari. Summum 
pre|tium sit—(v. 31-34 seguuntur pretia gladiatorum). 

Et haec sit summo ac formonso gladiatori defi||nita quantitas, 
Utique in omnibus muneribus quae generatim distincta sunt, lanista 
dimidiam copiam universi numeri promisque multitu|dinis praebeat 


[Pi 4d eu 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


exque his qui gregari appellantur, qui melior /acertatws erit duobus 
milibus sub signo pugnet, nec quisquam ex eo numero | mille 
nummum minore. Lanistas etiam promovendos vili studio questus: 
sibi copiam dimidiae partis praebendae negantes esse ex nu|mero 
gregariorum uti sciant inpositam sibi necessitatem de ceteris quos 
meliores opinabuntur transferre tantisper plendi nu|meri grega- 
riorum gratia. Itaque is numerus universae familiae aequis partibus 
in singulos dies dispartiatur, zeque ullo die minus quam || dimidia 
pars gregariorum sit ibi eo die dimicabunt. Utque ea opservatzo 
a lanistis quam diligentissime exigatur, intungendum | his qui pro- 
vinciae praesidebunt et legatis vel quaestoribus vel legatis legionum 
vel is qui ius dicunt c(larissimis) v(iris) aut procuratorzbus maxi- 
morum | principum quibus provinciae rector mandaverit; is etiam 
procuratorzjus qui provinciis praesidebunt. Trans Padum autem 
perque omnes Italiae | regiones arbitrium iniungendum praefectis 
alimentorum <dandis>, si aderunt, vel viae curatori aut, si nec is 
praesens erit, iuridico vel | tum classis praetoriae praefecto. || 

Item censeo de exceptis ita opservandum, ut praecipuum mer- 
cedes gladiator sibi quisque paciscatur, elus pecuniae quae ob hanc 
causam excipijebatur, quartam portionem liber, servus autem quin- 
tam excipiat. De pretis autem gladiatorum opservari paulo ante 
censui secundum praescrip|tum divinae orationis, sed ut ea pretia 
ad eas Civitates pertineamt, in quibus ampliora gladiatorum pretia 
flagrabant. Quod si quibus civitatibus | res publica tenuior est, non 
eadem serventur quae aput fortiores civitates scripta sunt, nec supra 
modum virium onerent, sed hactenus in eundem, | ut quae in 
publicis privatisque rationibus repperientur pretia summa ac media 
ac postrema, si quidem provinciarum eae Civitates sunt, ab eo || 
qui praesidebit provinciae opserventur, ceterarum autem iuridico 
vel curatori provinciae vel classis praetoriae praefecto vel procura- 
tori | maxumorum principum, uti Culusque Civitatis potestasque ibi 
prima erit. Atque ita rationibus decem retroversum annorum in- 
spectis, exemplis | munerum in quaque Civitate editorwm conside- 
ratis, conserventur ab eo cuius arbitrium erit de tribus pretis: vel si 
melius ei videbitur | ex eo modo quem persequitur efficiat et tri- 
fariam pretia deducantur eaque forma etiam in posterum servetur. 
Sciantque v(iri) c(larissimi), qui procon|sules paulo ante profecti 


[ 432 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


sunt, intra suum quisque annum it negotium exsequi se oportebit, 
li etiam, qui non sortito provincias || regant, intra annum. | 

Ad Galliam sed et princeps........ » qui in civitatibus splendi- 
dissimarum Galliarum veteri more et sacro ritu expectantur, ne 
ampliore pretio | lanistae praebeant, quam binis milibus. Cum 
maximi principes oratione sua praedixerint fore, ut damnatum ad 
gladium | procurator eorum......... nisi plure quam sex aureis 
et nisi iuraverit. | 

Sacerdotes quoque provinciarum quibus nullum cum lanistis 
negotium erit, gladiatores a prioribus sacerdotibus sus||ceptos vel 
sibimet auctoratos recipiunt, at post editionem eodem pretio in suc- 
cedentes tramztfunt; neque singulatim aliquem | rei gladiatoriae 
causa vendat plure quam lanistis est pretium persolutum. | 

Is autem qui aput tribunum plebei c(larissimum) v(irum) sponte 
ad dimicandum profitebitur, cum habeat ex lege pretium duo milia, 
liberatus si discri|men instauraverit, aestimatio eius post hac (sester- 
tium) x1r (milia) non excedat. Is quoque qui senior atque inabilior 
operam suam denuo...... 

l. 50. provinciae; viae, Hirschfeld. 

]. 54. oportebit ii for oportere eos. 

1. 56. ad Galliam...civitatibus; ad Gallicas editiones quae in civitatibus, 
Hirschfeld. 

]. 58. after procurator eorum some words have been Lost. 

At several points in this inscription, indicated by italics, emendations 
of scholars have been admitted into the text. Mere orthographical or gram- 
matical errors which do not obscure the sense have usually been allowed to 
stand. 


A bronze tablet, found in 1888 near Italica in Baetica, now in 
Madrid. Commodus was named imperator in Nov. 176. He was 
therefore the colleague of M. Aurelius until the latter’s death in 
180. The inscription consequently falls between these dates (cf. 
1. 6), but since M. Aurelius was absent from Rome on a campaign 


against the Marcomanni from 178 to 180, this document probably | 


falls in the year 176 or 177. 

The plays and games which were given annually in all the prin- 
cipal towns of the empire and the yearly games at the meetings of 
the concilia (cf. no. 155) constituted a heavy charge on the municipal 
budget. At Urso in Spain in the first century B.c., each duovir and 


AMA [ 433°] 28 


is fe, 


60 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


aedile was called on to contribute at least 2000 sesterces, and the 
city added from the public treasury 2000 for each duovir and 1000 
for each aedile (cf. no. 26, chapp. 70-71). Pliny’s letters to “Trajan 
refer frequently to the large sums which were being spent by the 
cities in his province on theatres, amphitheatres, and baths (cf. 
Epp. 23, 39). The gifts and bequests made by private citizens (cf. 
Liebenam, St. Verw. 118, n. 73 119, n. 1) added materially to the 
sums spent each year. Some records of the cost of these entertain- 
ments are given by Guiraud, Les assemblées prov. 130. The central 
government was aware of the heavy financial burden which these 
festivals laid on the municipalities, and Cassius Dio (52. 30) makes 
Maecenas advise Augustus to forbid them outside of Rome, but 
this document contains the earliest formal action looking to economy 
in such matters of which we have any record. How serious the 
matter has become is indicated by ll. 23-24, /abentem civitatium 
statum et praecipitantes 1am in ruinas princtpalium virorum fortunas. 
The subject is brought before the senate in the form of an oratio 
principum (cf. \l. 13, 28, 47, 57). This would probably be read by 
the quaestor, and immediately put to vote by the presiding officer 
(cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 899; Abbott, 350). ‘The speech which 
Claudius made in a similar way de ture honorum Gallis dando has 
come down to us (cf. no. 50 and Tac. Aun. 11. 24-25). This in- 
scription contains a speech made by a senator sometime after the 
reading of the oratio principum (cf. ubi rumore delatum est, |. 13). 
The proposal of M. Aurelius and Commodus, like the speech of 
Claudius, and like the messages of the President of the United 
States, was probably cast in the form of a general recommendation. 
One of the senators, on the basis of this recommendation, proceeds 
to formulate a bill. His motion, following the preamble (Il. 1-22), 
consists of two parts: (1) a vote of thanks to the emperors (Il. 23—29), 
and (2) certain articles limiting the amount of money which may 
be spent on gladiatorial contests (Il. 29-63). The provisions of the 
measure are to be enforced by imperial officials (Il. 41-44, 50-55). 
On these officials, cf’ Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 8, 509-511. To make 
the new arrangement easier for those who give the games, the 
emperors have already provided for the remission of the tax paid 
to the fiscus of one-third or one-fourth of the gains made by the 


[ 434 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


lanistae (cf. ll. 5-6). The sum of 2,000,000 or 3,000,000 sesterces 
which the senator estimates (cf. 1. 8) will be lost annually by the 
fiscus, in consequence of the remission of this tax, gives us some 
conception of the large amounts spent on these games. To the 
sacerdotes Romae et Augusti, upon whom fell the duty of arranging 
the games held at the annual meeting of the conci/ium, the imperial 
proposal appealed very strongly (cf. ll. 13-20). It is interesting to 
notice incidentally that M. Aurelius had apparently urged in support 
of the imperial measure the inhumanity of the gladiatorial contests 
(cf. ll. 3-8). On the salaries to be paid the gladiators, cf’ Mommsen, 
Ges. Schr. 8, 521-531. 


III. RESCRIPTUM COMMODI DE SALTU BURUNITANO 
(180-183 p. Chr.) 


CIL. vit, 10570; cf. S. 14464; Dessau, 6870; Bruns, 86; 
Girard, p. 199; Riccobono, p. 361. 


.....intellegis praevaricationem quam non mode cum Allio 
Maximo adver|sario nostro, set cum omnibus fere con|ductoribus 
contra fas atq. in perniciem | rationum tuarum sine modo exercuit, || 
ut non solum cognoscere per tot retro | annos instantibus ac supli- 
cantibus | vestramq. divinam subscriptionem | adlegantibus nobis 
supersederit, ve|rum etiam hoc eiusdem Alli Maximi || conductoris 
artibus gratiosissimi | w/timo indulserit, ut missis militib. | 7 eundem 
saltum Burunitanum alilos zostrum adprehendi et vexari, alilos 
vinciri, nonullos, cives etiam Ro|lmanos, virgis et fustibus effligi 
iusse|r#t, scé/icet eo solo merito nostro, qu|od venientes in tam gravi 
pro modulo me|docritatis nostrae tamq. manifesta | imzuria im- 
ploratum maiestatem tul|am acerliore epistula usi fuissemus. Culzus 
nostrae iniuriae evidentia, Caes., | zde profecto potest aestimari, 


ads 8 quidem, quem maiesta|¢..... exsistimamus vel pro || 
AAS t';ommino; [cognos’s|tiivenie ee plane gratificati | 
Peete ss. mum inverierit [i\2.h.. . ste). nostris, quibus |...... 
Borpamusscognd |[ss.i%s) sii beret inte]. ..... .praestare operas | 
MAY, tats ....ret ita tot relfro.....ttu....(deficiunt quaedam). 


Quae res compulit nos miserrimos homi|es cam rursum divinae 
providentiae | tuae suplicare, et ideo rogamus, sa|cratissime imp., 


[ 485~] 28-2 


Col. 11 


5 


20 


25 


30 


Col, 111 


Col. 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


Io 


15 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


subvenias. Ut kapite le||gis Hadriane, quod supra scriptum est, 
ad|emptum est, ademptum sit ius etiam proccb., | nedum conductori, 
adversus colonos am|pliandi partes agrarias aut operar. prae|bi- 
tionem iugorumve et ut se habent littere || procc. quae sunt in 
tabulario tuo tractus Kar|thag., non amplius annuas quam binas | 
aratorias, binas sartorias, binas messo|rias operas debeamus, itq. sine 
ulla contro|versia sit, utpote cum in aere inciso et ab || omnib, 
omnino undig. versum vicinis nost. | perpetua in hodiernum forma 
praesttu|tum et procc. litteris quas supra scripsimus | ita confzr- 
matum. Subvenias, et cum homi|nes rustici tenues manwum_ nos- 
trarum opellris victum tolerantes conductor profusis | largitionib. 
gratlosismo (szc) impares aput procc. tuos simus, quib. igs vices 
successi|on. per condicionem conductionis notus est, | miserearzs 
ac sacro rescripto tuo n. ampli|jus praestare nos, quam ex lege 
Hadriana et | ex litteras proce. tuor. debemus, id est ter | binas operas, 
praecipere digneris, ut bene] ficio maiestatis tuae rustici tui vernulae | 
et alumni saltwzum tuorum n. ultr. a conduc||torib. agror. fiscalium 
Inquietemur (defictunt quaedam). 

Imp. Caes. M. Aurelius Commodus An|tominus Aug. Sarmat. 
Germanicus | Maximus Lurio Lucullo et nomine alliorum. Procc. 
contemplatione dis||cipulinae et instituti mei ne plus | quam ter 
binas operas curabunt, | ne quit per iniuriam contra perpe|tuam 
formam a vobis exigatur. | Et alia manu: scripsi. Recognovi. || 
Exemplum epistulae proc, e. v. | Tussanius Aristo et Chrysanthus | 
Andronico suo salutem. Secundum | sacram subscriptionem domini 
n. | sanctissimi imp., quam ad libellum || suum datam Lurius Lu- 
cullus accepit...... (defictunt versus sex) et alija manu: opfamus te 
feli|cissimum bene vivere. Vale. Dat. | pr. idus Sept. Karthagini. || 
Feliciter | consummata et dedicata | idibus Mais Aureliano et 
Corne|liana cos. Cura agente | C. Iulio Pelope Salaputi, mag(istro). 

Engraved ona stone found in 1879 at Souk-el-Khmis, the ancient 
saltus Burunitanus, in northern Africa. The inscription is in four 
columns. Of these the first is almost entirely lost; on the lower 
part of the second column, the lines are broken on the left side; 
the third and fourth columns are intact. Commodus took the title 
of Pius in 183. The inscription therefore falls between 180 and 
183. [he most important commentaries on it and on related 


[ 436 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


subjects are those of Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 3, 153 ff; Esmein, 
Mélanges @hist. et du droit, 293 ff.; Fernique and Cagnat, Rev. 
arch. 41 (1881), 94 ff, 138 ff; Karlowa, 1, 616, 656 f,, 924 ff; 
Fustel de Coulanges, Recherches sur quelques problémes a’ histotre, 
33 ff; Schulten, Die rémischen Grundherrschaften; Beaudouin, Les 
grands domains dans [empire romain; Schulten, Kio, 7 (1907), 
195 f.; Hirschfeld, 122 ff}; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 332 ff. 
‘The inscription is made up of four parts: (1) the /bel/us of the 
coloni of the saltus Burunitanus (col. 1, 11, 11); (2) the subscriptio 
of Commodus (rv, 1 ff:); (3) the epistula procuratoris tractus Cartha- 
giniensis (IV, 10 ff.), addressed to Andronicus, the procurator saltus 
Burunitant; (4) the date of publication and name of the communal 
oficial. Of the people mentioned in the document, Allius Maximus 
(11, 2) 1s a conductor; Lurius Lucullus (tv, 2) represents the peti- 
tioners; Tussanius Aristo (iv, 11) is the procurator tractus Carth.; 
Chrysanthus is his assistant; Andronicus (Iv, 12) 1s procurator saltus 
Burunitani; and Salaputis (1v, 29) the magzster of the saltus, who 
probably superintends the construction of the altar on which the 
stone containing the inscription is cut. The tenants complain that 
the procurators have been unduly influenced and bribed by the 
contractors, that soldiers have been brought in, that they them- 
selves have been seized and punished, and that their annual con- 
tributions of produce and labor have been raised beyond the limits 
fixed in the /ex Hadriana. Heitland (Agricola, 347) thinks that 
the phrase, a/umni saltuum tuorum, implies that their holdings had 
descended to the present tenants from their fathers. 

Not far from the place where this inscription was found, and 
probably within the limits of the saltus Burunitanus, a fragment 
of another rescript of Commodus, addressed to Lurius Lucullus, has 
been discovered (CJL. vit, 8. 14451). This document is also a 
reply to the complaints of the co/onz. In another /zbellus (CIL. vitt, 
S. 14428), addressed to the same emperor, the tenants on an im- 
perial domain complain of the wrongs done them, and refer to the 
fact that they are required to furnish twelve days’ work each year. 
Apparently there was concerted action among the coloni in Africa 
under Commodus. For similar complaints from the Orient, cf. 
nos. 141 and 142. 


ee 7 | 


-MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Sy, 


40 


For an imperial reply to a similar complaint from an imperial 
domain in Phrygia, cf. Bruns, 93. The appeal to the emperor in 
the document before us, probably through the procurator saltus 
(11, 20), was made by Lurius Lucullus, the representative of the 
tenants, and the emperor’s rescript is addressed to Lucullus. A copy 
of it is sent to the procurator tractus, who communicates it to the 
procurator saltus (cf. quam. ..accepit, 1V, 15). In their appeal the 
tenants rely on three documents, viz. the /ex Hadriana (111, 5), the 
litterae procuratorum (111, 9 f.), and the perpetua forma (111, 16). 
For the first two documents, cf. no. 93 and p. 16. The forma 
perpetua is the lex Hadriana (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 332 f.). The 
colont have not yet been reduced to serfdom. Some of them are 
Roman citizens (11, 14 f.). For the history of the imperial domains, 
their political organization, and the decline in the status of the 
coloni, cf. pp. 16 ff. For the form of an imperial subscriptio, cf. 
pp. 242 ff. The petition would go to the scrinzum a hibelhs. 


112. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS COMMODI AD CHERSO- 
NESITANOS DE CAPITULO LENOCINII 
(185-186 p. Chr.) 


Latyschev, 4, 81; CIL. 11, 8. 13750; Cagnat, JGRR. 1, 860, 
ll. 32 ff. 

E(xemplum) e(pistulae). Tiva évéoresda “Arevrias I petpe-| 
[aves Kxal dd2Xo«s Tepl TOD TopVLKOD TEX lous, UToTayhvat éxéXevTA 
Tpovowy wHTE vas Tapa TA Sedoypéva éevoynré|[CecOar, pte 
Tovs Huety UTnpleTovYTas UTEepBaivery TOV TrEpiryEeypappéevor 
épov. E(xemplum) e(pistulae). || 

Ut sctas quae sint officta militum agentium in vexillatione Cher- 
sonessitana de capitulo lenocini quod sud.]....... , mist tibt exem- 
plum sententiae Arri Alcibiadis tunc trib(uni) praepositi eiusdem 
vexilla|tzonis..... .us tam intentionem eius quam manifeste de- 
terminatam partem ad ius per|tinentem..... et quoniam idem Alci- 
biades videri non <po>potest sub tempus venturum(?).|......recu- 
perandae vectigalis quantitatis sponte suscepisse, cum sententiam sub 
iudi||cez forma....... pridem et dixerit et proposuerit et omnibus 
annis fisco pariaverit, dubium non est | debere et circa vectigalis 


[Ajo ee 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


quantitatem et circa discipulina(e) ratione(m) et observare et ob- 
tinere | volo, eius sententiae exemplum aperta manu scriptum, unde 
de plano recte legi possit iuxta | ........ positum esse cura. 

E(xemplum) e(pistulae). Quid scripserim Atilio Primiano trzbuno | 
LN rio commilitionum, quod ad me<e> idem tribunus propter 
capitulum lenol|cimz...... secundum formam sententiae Arri Alci- 
biadis tunc trib(uni) dictae om..|..... causas ne quid adversus 
discipulinam vel cum iniuria aut contumelia paganorum commit- 
tatur. | 

E(xemplum) e(pistulae). Quid ad decretum Chersonessitanorum 
rescripserim, Co|gnoscetis ex 11s quade....... es subici praecipi, et 
rursum admoneo caveatis ne sub obtentu huzws|modi inquisttionts 
milites ordinatam iam pridem placitam ac custoditam cum dispendio 


vestrae exsistzma||tionis......... mquietent vel innovare quid 
temptent. 
[AveoraOn(?)......- ] et apxovtav Tey Tept M. Avp. Bacu- 


Nevovavov AreEavdpov: [’EmpéoBevor(?)....] Pr. ’Apiorav kai 
Ovarépios Teppavos. 


From the T’auric Chersonesus. We have omitted the fragmentary 
beginning of this bilingual document (Il. 1-31). The citizens of 
Chersonesus had appealed to the emperor Commodus in regard to 
the collection of the tax on prostitutes (I!. 13-31 in the part omitted). 
This was an imperial tax first instituted by Gaius (Suet. Gaz. 40), 
and collected by officers of the army. The evidence for this tax 
under the empire is collected by Domaszewski in editing the in- 
scription (CTL. 111, S. 13750). Apparently there had been some 
dispute between the municipality and the officials who collected 
the tax. The emperor, in his letter to Primianus the chiliarch and 
Valerius Maximus the centurion, bidsthem to collect the tax without 
offence to the citizens and without exceeding the amount pre- 
scribed. For the exactions of the soldiery, cf. pp. 136/., and 
nos. 68, 139-144. 


[ 439 ] 


45 


59 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


113. EPISTULA IULI SATURNINI, LEGATI 
SYRIAE, AD PHAENESIOS 
(185-186 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 1119; Ditt. Or. Gr. 609; Lafoscade, 117. 

‘TovrAsos Laltoupvivo|s Pawnailow pntpol|copias tod | Tpa- 
xovos | xaipevv. | Edy tis viv | erodnunone || Bcaiws otpa| tiers 
H | Kai idv@arns, | értoteirar|tés prot éx||OuxnOnoec|Oar* ovTe | 
yap ovvero|popay tilva odetrel|re tots Eé|vous, nal &elvava 
éyov|tes od Ov|vacbe aval|veacOhlvar déEac|Oat tats oi|Kiass 
tovs | Eévous. Tad||ra wou ta | ypappata | év rpodyrlas Ths 
un|TpoKka@ps||as tuav x|@piwr mpoblete, uy tus | @s ayvon|oas - 
atroXo||lynontac. 

The date of this inscription from Phaena in Syria is determined 
by Harrer (Studies in the History of the Roman Province of Syria, 40). 
‘The villagers complained to the governor that they had been com- 
pelled to furnish hoespitium to soldiers and others, although there 
was an official hostel in their village. For similar complaints, cf. 


nos. 139, 141-144. 


114. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS LYCIAE ET 
PAMPHYLIAE AD SIDYMEOS 
(185-192 p. Chr.) 

CapnatiG RRi2, bogs tht acelin 

"El a[pxvepéos tTLadv YeBalotav Acoyér[ovs] y’ Tod Mntpo- 
dwpou, Aciou B’, eionyno[a]uévov Tod ypapu|watéws THs BolvArs 
An|uocbévous told Av ]|SpoBiov, érupndicapévou dé Tod lepéos 
tov YeBactav “AreEdv|dpov tod Avool[vos]. “Errel dua tovds 
[ev]tuyertdtous Katpods Tod Betotatou AvToKpatopos Kaica- 
OCW seals iG, 36" LeBactod EKiceBois Evtuyods, cal dia tHv Tod 
Kpatiotov || avOumratou Catov Uourrewviov Balol|oou Tepevtiavov 
Tepl Tas modes avEnow, Kal 7 tpetépa | ods éndicato 
CUTTNMLA YEpovTiKOV KATA TOV VOmoV, évydjou BovANS Kal ExAN- 
cias dyouélvns, éo€ev ypadhvar Widiopa TO Kpatiotw avOv- 
matw dv ov TapaxrAnOjvar Kal avTov auveTikup@cat | THY THs 
Bovrjs Kat Tod Sypou xpicw X Se a tbyn ayabyn dedoyPar 
Yu8upéov TH BovrAy cal TH Syuw | cuvyeypadpCat tode To 


[ 440 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


[W]ndioua 6 Kal avadoOnva. atte bro tod a€soNoywTaTou 
Avetdpyov, Tronei||rov judy, Tr. Kr. TyrXeuadyou Hav[O]iou Kai 
Lwdupéos. [loura(vios) Bacoos avOu(matos) Sidupéwy | dpxover 
BovrAyn Syuw yaipev. Ta cares yesvoueva érratvetobat wadrrov 
mpoa|nxer % Kupodobar, éyer yap TO BéBao[y] ad éavTar. 
"Eppdcbat twas edyowat. “ExopuicOn éri tod avtod | Aueidpxou 
"AmredXalov Ky, éveypadn bd EvérOovtos tod kat Evtuyéous 
Tereciov Lwdupéos | yupvacvapyncavtos THs yepouatas [7 ]po- 
TOU. 


From Sidyma in Lycia. The name of the emperor, erased in 
antiquity, was that of Commodus. He received the title of Felix 
in 185. The city of Sidyma had decreed the formation of a gerusia, 
in accordance with the laws which regulated such association. ‘This 
action was submitted to the provincial governor for approval and 
ratification. The proconsul replied that their action was more 
worthy of praise than of ratification; for worthy achievements 
carry their own confirmation. The phrase cata tov voor (I. 6) 
seems to imply that the action of the city required the sanction of 
the governor before the decree was valid, but it is also possible that 
the request for his approval was inspired by motives of vanity. The 
different theories of the purpose of the gerusia are discussed by 
Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 2.16 ff. The senate passed a decree 
authorizing the establishment at Cyzicus of a neon, or organiza- 
tion of young men (138-160 p. Chr., cf. no. 106). It may be 
noted that, in the later period, the Sidymeans did not think it neces- 
sary to refer the proposal for the formation of the gerusza to the 


senate. Cf. Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 327, 330. 


115. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(150-200 p. Chr.) 


ta 


An. ép. 1902, no. 164; Compt. rend. de Pacad. d. inscr. et bel. 


lettr. 1902, 38; Dessau, 6780. 


M. Servilio P. f. Quir. | Draconi Albuciano | m viro, flam. 
perp., | quod super multa in remp. || merita et amplissimum | muni- 
ficentiae studium le|gationem urbicam gratui|tam ad Latéwm maius 


5 


oO 


pe|tendum duplicem susce||perit tandemg. feliciter | renuntiaverit, 10 


[ 441 ] 


T5 


cn 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


ordo publi|ce ponendam censuit, et | cum is honore contentus | 
pecuniam rei p. remisis||set, populus de suo posuit. 


Found at Bou-Ghara (ancient Gigthi) in Tunis. The double 
cognomen and the form of the inscription make it probable that it 
belongs to the latter half of the second century. On Gigthi, ef. 
Reid, Municipalities of the Roman Empire, 293, and Constans, 
Nouv. arch. des missions, fasc. 14, 1916. On Latium minus and 
maius, cf. pp. 191 ff. and Reid, op. cit. 242. The legal distinction be- 
tween the two classes of rights was perhaps made by Hadrian. This 
inscription, with no. 95, illustrates the stages through which a 
village passed in its progress toward Roman citizenship. Gigthi, 
at first probably a cévitas stipendiaria, had already been made a 
municipium, since it had duovirs. Now it receives Latium maius. 
For another inscription from Gigthi, cf. no. 161. 


116. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(saec. I vel 11 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 634; T.4.MZ. 2, 291. 


XéEctov Mapxuiov | ‘AmroAXwvidov viov Kupetvas | ’Amor- 
Nwvidynv ['P]wuatov cat | HavOcov, rerele]unmévor || vd ths 
[B]ovArjs Kat tod Sypolv], | of averwévoe Tod éveveriov | ToTLKOD 
Téhous avéatnaav | é« Tod idtov Kata thy SiaOynKnv | amor- 
TOVTOS av| Tov] eis Tov || THS aTENELas AOyoU apyuptou | SnvdapLa 
TplamupLa. 

From Xanthus in Lycia. Sextus Marcius Apollonides, a Roman 
citizen and a Xanthian, left thirty thousand denarii as an endow- 
ment to provide funds for the munera or for some form of local tax 
in his native city. In Egypt we find 76 éyxvx«Avov TéXos as a ten 
per cent. tax on sales, and it is possible that a similar tax is mentioned 
here. ‘Those released from this burden set up a statue in honor of 
Sextus, and it is probable that a guild of merchants would render 
this honor, rather than hypothetical incumbents of a liturgy which 
might never be imposed. The sales-tax in the empire was usually 


one per cent. Cf. Hirschfeld, 73 ff. 


[ 442 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


117, HIERAPOLITANORUM DECRETUM 
DE PARAPHYLACIBUS 
(saec. I vel 11 p. Chr.) 
pitt nr Ges une 


["Exi orpatnyod Geog |irov Tod B’ vewrépou, wnvos Sexarof v 
et AOE. , | 60£e 7H |p ‘lepatrodectav THe Bourne él Tov apxale]- 
peciav: [Tods trapapvralxas TO Row |ov am éavtdv év Ttais 
K@mats TroveicOas éridy[piav, ep’ were || wndev erep lov avrtois 
Tapexew 7) wovov Evra Kal ayvpa Kal wor[nv, ddXro Sé pndev | 
Kndevrt a]\AXwL wt av Tote TpoTar. "Edy 8€ tis Tapa Tadra 
Toone 7 é[Tépwe TovodvTse cuplmrpaén, élrevyOévta memoun- 
Kéval TpocTeipou ovowaTe eis [TO Snudcvov | katatLO |évas adTov 
doa ay édevyOne eiinrpas Tapa Twos, dti[pwov dé | evar. Kal 
Tovs | érevyOévtas trapadvrAaxas pt) NauBavew tas Tapa TALS 


Kons rods line te ows ee. ] ) Kopmdpyas akovtas oredhavovy 
Tapag| vAaka, aTrodovvat | avTov TO] apytptov, Hrus [8] av Kou 
BournOqe crepavacat trapal PUAaKA,.. 1... eee ee Pak Meee : 


\ A \ f ES \ / % ¢e / / 
Tapa Tav|ra wnOev [y letver Oat’ ef Sé fu}, TOV UTrEvaVTiws ToLno- 
\ / > \ nA 3 / > / 4 
[avta pn TiOévar | eis TO TOD "Am ]oAXwVOS avabypata, bvTOS 
TovToOU Tov Whdicpato|s Kupiov | Kal] -éréyovTos. 


From a village near Hierapolis. ‘This document contributes some 
information on village-government under the municipalities. The 
villages of Hierapolis were provided with officials called comarchs. 
In addition police officers were sent from the city who had been 
guilty of making illegal exactions from the villagers. By this decree 
the paraphylaces are placed under more strict control, and are for- 
bidden to exact anything beyond a supply of wood for fuel, chaff 
for bedding, and housing during their stay. Other expenses must 
be met out of their own pocket. Honors must not be conferred by 
the village, especially under compulsion, and, apparently, if money 
is voted by the village to crown one of these officers, this sum must 
be restored. 


[443 ] 


Io 


n 


IO 


15 


20 


25 


30 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


118. EDICTUM AUCTORIS INCERTI AD BEROIAEOS 
(saec. I-11 p. Chr.) 


B.C.H. 37 (1913), 90f- 

SiNaeentas oe Oval A ]epear[os (2)..]........]va Tova?) eavar 
DAN ULGE ce 2 ois [eae nenes Ael iv] Tov épyoNaBov ws OTL pd- 
MotTla....|...] dav py Kalra) THY ev THe cvvypadhe cvpT- 
[voay (?)...||...cv]ugovou mpos éxrn(E)iv, Evoyos Extat ov 
mp[os (?)..|...7Td]v SeBactav eixovas éotedhavovpér[ as] PAI- 
PAMN[...|...79]v ypnudtav &odov tht twarpiou. SvotKnoes 
bmép (2)...|..(2 Kal tev THe] mONE TUmhepovT@Y, KaTaNuTeEtD 
dtenv tTnv [....|... GO0FE wos (?) TovT]we THe SvaTdypare Si0p- 
Odca érel Toivuy Kat[....||...... jatnv mpocdda. peyanra 
AuUTOvGaY, KeNEVW Tor[s...|..THY] Tpoppnaw apOAvat, «iTE 
heyerat, déka Sto Silautntas(?)...]....-- | cuvtnpyncews, dcat- 
poupévouv Tov éviautov [..... |... .dsaT ern tv hpovtida Tod 
Tpaywatos evar mpos[...|.... T]ov tdsov ypovoy ériperetas, 
éav KaTa THY ell..... |....] T@e 6é érradévts Kntrovpa. Kal 
oyeTnyourTse Sila ...|...] atoTdooe els THY TOD KaLvod Badra- 
vetov émif wéedecay (?)...|... lov odK oé(Ar)ne 7) yevér Pau: ei yap 
ToApnoes ev TT OL...| .... laxuryetrtoss els TO yUpVvacLapyXLKoV* 
mept welv ody (2)...|... damjavev wn wr€ov mpadttecPar TOU 
auvnbous i[rrép (2)... ||... alutais tuav mréova avvodov év 
éxdotat pnrit....[..... |rov Evreias: e¢ wey 0 Ypovos ETL LoL 
cuvexwpe[ito....|... émel otv] aprafetas tHe érretEer pov, 
KerAEVM TOdS yeplovctacTas(?)..|... Jesas, unde Sua TadTNs THS 
av0adias, Kai éve[pyeiy(?2)..|.... THs Tav] EVAwY yYpNoEws ws 
évoceatatTny Urns, Wore t...||...] wev yap TaYa Tepl TovUTOV 
be, Kat és Grav érei[yw(?)...|... T]as Tewpias aia ws THE 
ONULOL..... tHy extn Ew (2)..|...] adrtov cvvecyophabas: érret 
ovv Ta adda OvéTaka(?).... | Kal éropwpne |dunv Tos TODTO TOA- 
bovTas Tovey, avayp[awas(?)...|...-- | Tapetov: oyvpwotata 
TovTO TO didTaypa Be[Bara(?)..||....cKkavov] éotat Tacw evdiav 
écavayew. Kutvuyeire. | 

(vacat) 
Tye monet 

Bea "TJovrsavos dua THs ém[apyetas(?)...|...-- THS €Tl- 

pledelas THY oTHAANY yalpakas avéOnKev ex TOV] idiwv. 


[ 444 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


This inscription was found at Beroia in Macedonia, The marble 
is broken on the right and left sides, and the restoration of the 
document is extremely problematical. ‘The editors of the inscription 
suggest that it is an edict of an emperor, or the letter of a provincial 
governor. In brief, their interpretation of the contents is as follows: 
It treats of the friendly annulment of a contract which had been 
entered into between the city and a contractor who had undertaken 
some public work in which he had failed to fulfil the conditions. 
The suit is to be abandoned (1. 9), and apparently provision is made 
for some form of arbitration of claims (1. 12). The letter then takes 
up the case of a gardener who has diverted water from the New 
Baths, who is required to make amends or pay a fine to the gymna- 
siarch. Finally, hasty regulations are devised in regard to the supply 
of wood, which is becoming scarce, and the fines which are to be 
imposed for the violation of these provisions. It is unfortunate that 
the document is so fragmentary, for this might give us some informa- 
tion on the important question of deforestation in ancient times. 


119. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE AD COOS 
(saec. I-II p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1044; Paton and Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos, 26. 


[Aveis: ay TuOomevos Ex TOV bpeT lépov Wndhiopal[Tos OTv..... THV 
éxx now ero él | [Tov YeBaotov, ixavds joo |Oounv émn- 
petas | [ydps]v adtov [To lito mreronKévar: del|[dv 7 Jotvur, et wer 
émi tov YeBaarov | [7H ex]kAnouws yeiverar, mpot[elpov eye | 
Lefer ]doas tyv aitiav: et Oé éw epé, TO | [rrapd |v aEtoxypews Na- 
Bety rods a[p|paRav jas dnvapiov dicyerdiov [e]v||[TaKxo(ciwv) 


Kata] To mpote[O lév br” €[ujo[d] o[dv|ray]ua Sea rods huyods[c]-, 


xouvtras | [éav d]é wpos Tadta uny..... 


This inscription from Cos deals with the right of appeal. A 
citizen of Cos had lost his case in the local court, and threatened to 
appeal. ‘he Coans sent a memorial to the governor, and his reply 
is recorded in this document. If the appeal is to the emperor, the 
governor must first examine the case to decide whether it should 
be forwarded to Rome. If the appeal is made to the court of the 


[ 445 ] 


Io 


Io 


Col. 1 


5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


provincial governor, the appellant must provide a cautio of 2500 
denarii, which was required by an edict of the governor in order to 
guard against unwarranted appeals (cf. Hicks, /oc. cit.; Mommsen, 
Zeitschr. d. Savigny-Stift., Roman. Abteil. 24 (1890), 34 ff-3 nos. 36, 
40, 90, 121). Nothing in this document implies that Cos was a 
civitas libera at this time, but the fact that appeals could be taken 
from the local court to the governor does not necessarily imply that 
Cos was a part of the province of Asia (cf. no. 90). On the status 
of Cos, see Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 115. 


120. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS INCERTI AD PRO- 
CONSULEM SEU LEGATUM ASIAE 
(saec. II p. Chr.) 


Rev. d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 83. 

(Primi versus, maxime mutili, omissi sunt.) 

Hs gen ee de..as Ta peta|[TH]s cor mpoonkovens éru|[pe]- 
Nelas, dua TpovoovpeE| vos Kal TOV TA Operdopeva || TOY YpnUaToV 
elompattec|Pat THe TOdeEL, KaTeTréwrpalwev SE cot Kal TAS Tap’ 
nuav | év[to]Xas iva Kal THY Hyeté|pav | [cu]uBovrAnv ev roils 
tpa||[xO]noopévors éx[ne]s. “Eppaco. 

From Aphrodisias. This letter seems to refer to the collection 
of certain sums due to the city. Since Aphrodisias was a civitas 
libera (cf. no. 29), the governor could not interfere in her internal 
affairs without the consent of the civic authorities or the authoriza- 
tion of the emperor (cf. Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 47-48). Reinach, 
who published the inscription, suggests that the document may also 
be interpreted as a letter from a governor to an agonothete as in 


C1IG. 2742. 


I2I. RESCRIPTUM IMPERATORIS AD LACEDAEMONIOS 
(saec. II p. Chr.) 
COL Fhe 


earth dé [rlov[t]ov éxalor.....|... ovder]omore repi ris 
> a / A xX fal \ / 
éuavto[D....|...] worepov mpabjvar i prcOodc8a Kat [7 ]o|- 
X\ 


[Tepov ovptravtas..Tlovs aypovs % KaTa pépos, Trapavar || 
[....mpoo]odous wéuvnuar modda@s metCovas | [....... |v wat 


[ 446 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Sedwpnpévov buiv alt[nlow |[...mpocodlovs érecOar, et ETéEpa 


picOwors ylévloul[to...... mlovety vas, k[at élav TO TpiTov 
TASVUD) | [ee erat TOU | TOLTOU.. . sue s éré[ pas] || 
cei ty) ee rela] | (vacat) o[vre tHv éx] Tov [er |I- 


KrAnoewv BonOevav [Tlodvs adsKovpé|vous otowar div aperpnabat 
ovTe ahopuny TavTny yelve|cOas Tots cUKOpaVTOVGLY WS TA TE 
Onpooia Kal iduwtixa || un TedXetoPat KaTa TovS Vvomous S10 dy 
Tept pev TOV audi|cBnTycEwr, aitives dv wow EXATTOVS {a 
Snvapiov Kal py|te KpiTnpiov % TpoKpyma Kepadixyns Sixns 
xX > / v4 > lal / X\ / a) 
H émitiplas EEovlow, émixareioGai pe 7) retO[e]oPar Tots 
> / £ \ \ > / a , 

émikarecapévors Kw|[A]d@s* Tas Sé érikAnoes, as [yletverOae 
émitpéeT@t, dvaxpivéTo||cav of avved|por, moTepov O(t)Kaiws 

/ ee Vaal A si / / \ A 
yelvovtar }) ert Tat TLa]s di|[Kas....Tds TE 7 ]poBoras Troteta Pac 


CiSN Tie [LD MOLY I) [VLbae's Weer er es coe) a of octve|dpor TOL TraTpiws 
AICHE OM Sea Reiner ae 7 |wepa at. évt| OS. | « » &'s o's sabe ey 
Kpuv jérmoay. 


From Mistra near Sparta. The inscription is engraved in two 
columns, but the content of col. 1 can only be determined in a 
general way owing to the fragmentary condition of the stone. The 
document appears to deal with different problems. In col. 1 there 
is a reference to the rental or sale of public lands owing to a de- 
preciation in local revenues. In col. 1 the subject of appeal is 
considered. The emperor forbade appeals to his jurisdiction in cases 
involving less than a thousand denarii, and those which do not 
involve the death penalty or loss of civic rights. All appeals must 
be submitted to a board of synedri, who shall determine whether 
the appellant has just grounds for his petition or whether he is 
merely attempting to delay justice (cf. nos. 36, 90, 119). At Athens 
syndics, elected by the people, heard appeals before they were for- 
warded to the emperor (cf. no. 90), while at Cos the governor decided 
such questions (cf. no. 119). It is evident that the emperors were 
seeking to discourage the practice of appealing to Rome on trivial 
questions, but uniform legislation had not yet been devised in regard 
to procedure. A comparison of this document with no. go shows 
that the free cities received laws from Rome, and appeals from their 
local courts to the emperor had already become an established 
practice (cf. Mitteis, Rezchsrecht und Volksrecht, 87 f.). 


[ 447 ] 


Col. 


On 


Io 


on 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


122. TITULUS HONORARIUS POGLENSIS 
(saec. I vel 11 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 409. 

[I]o[wAc]o[v] Kair[e]lov [A]oux[cavov ... Jol... ayo ]|vobe- 
ThoavTa ayova Tevt[aeTnpiKoy avy | Te] avdpidow Kat BpaBetots 
Kal Tecun[Oévta 8(%), | Sledwxora Svavopas éreow Tod[itecas | || 
Bovrevtais Te Kal éxrno.actats [Kal 7a ]|ou TonelTass, KTLCovTAa 
epya The TOA, Kpel|vovTa ToTiKa SiKacTHpLa éTeT LW KoLV@|v[ Las |, 
Téuravta avvavav eis TO “Ade~av|dpéwv Ovos, mpon[y op[7- 
cavt ja xai || [rpecBevoa|vra v7e[p THs 76 |News, | [yévous T ]od 
mpeltevovT jos év | [rhe ma ]rpis.. 

This inscription from Pogla in Pisidia was first published by 
Rostowzew in ‘Fahreshefte d. ést. arch. Inst. 4 (1901), Bezblatt, 
38 ff. The document ts important because it marks the development 
of a village on an imperial estate into a municipal organization. 
The reference in Il. 6-8: xpeivovta tomixd dtxactypia éTeow 
Kotv@vias, shows that Publius Caelius Lucianus acted as local 
judge when the community was still a xowvdv. On the quasi- 
municipal organization of the imperial villages and their develop- 
ment into towns, cf. Ramsay, Studies in the History and Art of 
Asia Minor, 305 ff.; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 288 ff. Cf. 
nos. 139, 140-1423; pp. 23 f. It should be noted that the citizens 
of the new city are divided into BovAeutai, éxxAnovacrai and 


moniras (cf. Levy, Rev. d. é. grec. 8 (1895), 209). 


123. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(saec. II p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 788; Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, 2, 462. 

‘H Sovd1) Kai o d4 mos Kai ot KatoiKody Tes ‘Pwpaior | éreiunoav 
TiBéprov KXavdcov TiBepiov Kravdiou Mz|@piddrov viov Kupei- 
vat Ietcwva MiOpidatiavor, tepéa | dua Biov Ards Kerauvéws, 
yupvaciapynoavta Sv ayollpalas Kai ayopavopnoavta 8. ayo- 
patas, kal épnBapynoarta, | Kat bTocyouevov brép Kravdiou 
Tpar{v)cavod Tod viod | yupvaciapyiav Sv ayopaias ék TOV idtov 
Kal yapiodpevov | The TONE TOV €E EBovs Siddpmevov iT’ adits 


[ 448 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


TOL yupvalorapxYodvTL TOpoy SnVvapLa pupLa TreVTaKLcyYEldLa Kal 
The pev || rparne éFapnven, év He Kat 7) ayopatos HYOn, Gévta TO | 
EXaov, Urrép dé TOV NoTraV pnvav bE SedoKdTa, | KaOws 1) TONS 
n&iwoer, Snvdpia pvpia évanioyel|\ua, wWoTe TMpooTEbévta Kal 
TOUTOV TOV TOpor | Tols LUPLoLS TEVTAKLOXELALOLS ONVapLoLs aw CeLr || 
Toxov Spayywaiov eis TO TOV KOVpATOpwY ETrL| CH uLoV TO KATA ETOS 
vr avtayv diddopevov, Bo|TE TOD RoLTrOY yYpdvoU pHKETL Elvat 
Koupato|pas, Kabws 7 Torts eyndicato, Su Grou | TOD ai@vos, 
THY avdotacw ToLncapéevor || ex TOV LOiwy TOV év Thr Oepmaias 
TATELAL. 

From Apamea in Phrygia. The nature and purpose of the en- 
dowment has been the subject of considerable dispute. Mommsen 
(E.E. 7, 436 ff-) believed that the city was enabled to dispense with 
the curator conventus Romanorum, but this is unlikely, for the city 
probably had no jurisdiction over this organization. Ramsay (/oc. 
cit.) believed that Apamea used the endowment to get rid of the 
curator ret publicae. Vhisofficial, however, wasalwaysstyled XoytorNs 
in the East, and there is no evidence that more than one ever held 
office in any city at the same time. Nor is it likely that a city which 
could spend so lavishly would need a curator. It is possible that an 
explanation may be found in a document from Cibyra (Cagnat, 
IGRR. 4, 914; cf. thd. 4, 259), where Quintus Veranius secured 
from the emperor the removal of Tiberius Nicephorus who exacted 
three thousand denarii annually from the city. It is, however, 
more probable that the endowment was devoted to defraying the 
liturgical expenses of certain officials in connection with the gymna- 
siarchy, and that curator is here used as an equivalent of liturgy 
(cf. Bérard, B.C.H. 17 (1893), 312). For similar endowments, 
cf. nos. 116, 150, 189. 


124. EDICTUM SEU EPISTULA PROCONSULIS AD EPHESIOS 
(saec. II p. Chr.) 


B.C.H. 7 (1883), 5043 Inschriften von Magnesia, 114. 


.06 Kal KaTa cuvOnK[as......avT@OV...... py ees eg 2 

Wd / > / \ A ? \ \ 7 
.ooTe cvp|Bailvew éviote Tov Shpov is Tapaynyv Kai Oopv- 

> 4 » \ \ ? / fA) / a 
Bous évrimtw dia thv a[Kato(?)|N]oyov Kxa(r)a(P)paciav tov 


AMA [ 449 ] 29 


10 


15 


20 


Io 


15 


s) 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


aptokoTav él TH ayopa atacewr, ep ois éxyphnv [ad| ]rovs peTa- 
meupbévtas Hd Sixnv UTrocyxetv* érel S€ 76 TH TOAEL TUMPE[ por ||| 
THS TOUTMY TLLwplas MaAXOV TpoTiMaY avayKaiov, Hynoapny 
Siatdy[wate] | avtods cwdpovicar. “Obey arrayopevw pyre 
cuvépyerbar Tovs aptox[o]|mous Kat éTaipiay pte TpoeoTy- 
KoTas Opacivecbat, TePapxetv S€ mL av]|Tws Tots Urép TOU KOLA 
cuphépovtos émiTatTopévors Kal THY alvay]|xatay Tov aptou 
épyaciav avevden tapéyew TH mode. “Os av ado Tis av]||rov 
TO aTO Tove 1) TUVLMOY Tapa Ta SinyopevpEeva 71) Oop¥Bov TLVOS 
[kal ord ]|ocews &Edpy wr, wetaTreupbels TH Tpornkovon TeLpwpia 
xoracOn[ cera]: | éav S€ Tus ToAMNON THY TdALY evEedpEevoD 
atoxpt Wai avror, “dexvecp[tas” él mo ]|d0s tpoconutwOnoeTat, 
Kal 0 TOV ToLoUTOV be UTrobeEdmevos [TH] | adTH TYwwpia bTevOvVOS 
yevnoetas. || Eat mputdvews Kr(avdiov) Modéorov, unvos KrXa- 
peavos &' ia(rapévov), BovrAns ayouelyns Kat (?)| | adAo pépos, 
Mapkerreivos eitrev' THs 5€ amrovolas TaV épyacTnplapyelv 
péye||orov Setypwa Ges “Eppeias 0 mpos TH TPAMIAQMET.... 
RU hag eM T Sp NPA ANTH 

From Ephesus. ‘The first part of this inscription contains the 
proclamation of the provincial governor who had been compelled 
to settle an outbreak and riot of the members of the bakers’ guild 
at Ephesus. ‘he subject of strikes in Asia Minor is discussed by 
Buckler, Anatolian Studies in Honour of Sir W. M. Ramsay, 27 ff. 
‘The municipal authorities were unable to deal with the situation 
and were compelled to appeal to the governor. Similarly in Per- 
gamum (Cagnat, /GRR. 4, 444) the proconsul interfered in a strike 
of the builders. Cf. Acts 19, 24 ff, where the riot of the silversmiths 
at Ephesus inspired fear of being called to account by the governor. 


125. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(150-200 p. Chr.) 
CIL. vi, §. 17899 = E.E. 5, 608. 


C. Annio Arminio Donato, clarissimo puero C. An|ni Flaviani, 
proc. patrimoni tractus Kar|thaginiensis, fi/io Anni Armini Do|nati, 
flaminis perpetuz nepoti, || concilium provinciae Africae. 


Found at Thamugadi. C. Annius Flavianus took part in one 


Ree tory 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


of the wars under M. Aurelius and Commodus (cf. CIL. vit, 
S. 17900), so that his son probably flourished toward the end of 
the second century. A tractus included several sa/tus, or imperial 
estates, and a procurator tractus held a post as important as that of 
a provincial procurator; cf. p. 19. This concilium prov. Africae 
seems to have been composed of representatives from the czvztates 
of both Africa Proconsularis and Numidia; cf. Kornemann, R.E. 
4, 808. 


126. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(saec. II p. Chr.) 


Rev. arch. 3 (1916), 339; An. ép. 1916, no. 120. 


Sacerdoti omnium Caesar, T. Vetuiro T. fil. Gol. Campestir 
auguir II viro II vir q. q. I vir Ir panec rgrati anuon sacerdoti da. . 
Ircuri condtoir patriat H 11 misso lecmo...a colonai nurbemsike- 
viatco...semelouidemardivom Hadrianum....11 auem adopti- 
mum maximum oue...bisimpcaesar TI. Aelium Hadrianum... 
Antoninum Auc Pium ex d. d. vicuscopdy. 


Transcription 
Sacerdoti omnium Caesarum, T. Veturio T. fil. Collina Cam- 
pestri, auguri, II viro, II viro quinquennali, 1 viro tertium....et 


curatori annonae, sacerdoti Dei Mercuri, conditori patriae, quater 
misso legato a colonia in Urbem sine viatico, semel quidem ad 
divum Hadrianum, ter autem ad optimum maximumque...Im- 
peratorem Caesarem T. Aelium Hadrianum Antoninum Aug. 
Pium ex decreto decurionum vicus..... 


On a marble column, found at Sinope, on which had stood a 
statue. The mistakes in the text are due to the difficulty which the 
Greek copyist had with the Latin letters and words. That the 
position of sacerdos omnium Caesarum ranked higher even than the 
chief magistracy in Sinope is shown by the place which it has at 
the beginning of the inscription. Veturius like many other Asiatics 
belonged to the tribus Collina. The particular point of interest for 
us is the fact that Veturius represented his native city four times 
on missions to Rome. For similar cases, cf. nos. 53 and 115. 


[ 451 ] 29-2 


Io 


5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


127. EPISTULA IMPERATORUM SEVERI ET 
CARACALLAE AD SMYRNAEOS 
(198-210 p. Chr.) 


CIG. 3178; Lafoscade, 72; Ditt. Sy//.3 876; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 
1402. 

Oi Gevorato. adtoxpdtopes Xeounpos Kal Avtwveivos Kaicapes 
Spupvaioss. | Ei Kravdzos ‘Poudivos 6 rroreitns buav o dia THY 
mpoaipecw | 7 cvvertw éml maidcia cal Tov év NOyoLs TUVEXN 
Biov thv | mpoxetpmévny Tots codiotais Kata Tas Gelas TOV Tpo- 
yover || nua@v dSuatd&es aTEXELAV TOV AELTOUPYLaV KapTrOvpeEVoS | 
bmOv avTov Exovciw avayKy TpoKaroupévan Upéeaty THY | TTPATN- 
ylav KaTa TO Tpos THY TaTpida PirTpov: THY your eis Ta | ANG 
pévely atrpaywoovrny akelvntov avT@ SuxaoraTtov | éoTiv* ov 
yap a&iov T@ avdpl THv eis Uuas HiroTeplay yevél|cPat Eyuiar, 
Kal wadioTa TAUTHV UM@V alTovYTwY UTrép | avTOD THY yapiv. 
Kirvyetre. | EapécRevov Avp. Avtawveivos cal Aidos Xarnpatos. 

From Smyrna. The cities of Asia were classified in three groups 
according to wealth and population. A letter of Antoninus Pius 
to the provincial assembly gave permission to the cities in each group 
to grant immunity to a specified number of doctors, rhetoricians, 
and philosophers (Dig. 27. 1. 6). Apparently the Asiatic cities had 
been too lavish in their grants of immunity to the professions, and 
the emperor curtailed their power in this respect. The case of 
Rufinus is not clear. Apparently he had enjoyed the privilege of 
immunity, but had forfeited it by undertaking a liturgy voluntarily. 
The city, apparently, had not the power to renew the grant at this 
period and sent an embassy to the emperor asking for the reinstate- 
ment of Rufinus in his former privileges. 


128. MYRENSIUM DECRETUM DE NAVIGATIONE 
(saec. II vel 111 p. Chr.) 
Le Bas-Waddington, 1311; CIG. 43024 (Add. p. 1136); Ditt. 
OF Gre 572. 
"Ayadie tyne. | “Edo tHe Bovrme | cal rads Sypor, | tpvTa- 
vewr yvo||un: émet dud TO | wn eEevpio|keww thy ért Ailuvpa 


10 TopOul|Knv @vnvy thv akillavy ocvuyBaive. é(Na)o|codcbat Tas 
pOuilenv @viyy Tt 


[ 452 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


mpoa|odous, wn é€eivas | Erepov mrapatrop|Ouedoar pnder || unre 
amo THs Aac[ei]las unte ard Tob otd|uaTos THs Aiwvns | 7) azo 
"Avdpiaxis, | 7) dhevrnoes THe Sy||uwe Uarép Exdotov | TAOds XK 
at’, éEou|ciav éyovtos a(t)élp(n)ow amoypadec|Oaz || Tod THv 
@|vnv éyov|tos Tod Te TAOL|ov Kal THY oKev|av avTod. || IIhedoes 
dé | wova ta atro|yeypaupéva | mrola Kal ois | av cuvywpr|lone 
o Thy avny | éxwv, NauBa|vovtos mavTos | vavAov 70 8 | Kal 
Tov évBar||A\ouévwv. “Edy | 8€ tus avtécto|Nov vavrAwont, | 
mpocghoveitw | Kal dv0dTw travTos || ToD vavXov TO 8, | 7H UIT0- 
KeloeTat THL | Tpoyeypampévar | TpocTEiuar. 

From Myra in Lycia. The right to ferry across the river Limyra 
was leased by the city to contractors, and considerable revenue was 
derived from this source. Private boatmen, however, had entered 
into competition against the company holding the lease from the 
city, and by offering lower rates made the municipal lease so unat- 
tractive that the city could find no bidders and was thus in danger 
of losing a profitable source of revenue. In this law the municipality 
creates a monopoly by forbidding private carriers the use of certain 
routes over which most of the traffic was carried. For similar 
monopolies, cf. no. 70; CTL, 11, 7151, 7152. 


129. EDICTUM M. ULPI PROCONSULIS. EPISTULA GEMINI 
MODESTI PROCONSULIS ACHAIAE AD THISBENSES 
(saec. II vel III. in. p. Chr. 


IG. vu, 2226, 2227, Add. p. 747; Ditt. Sy//.3 884. 


Mdapxos OvAmios [..avOvTaros Néyer]. | O Bovrouevos 
O.cBaiwv yopiov Sy[pdcctov 7) tepov .. pul|tedoar] Tay em’ éwod 
yewpyouuéevar [Tapadotw Tois oTpaTnyots THS Toews] | BiBréLov, 
ypawas €v avT@s Torov Te Ov Bol vAETat AaBeiv Kal hopov sv 
SHcer Kat || évleavTov virép Exdotouv TAEOpor[..| Bov]rAAs 77 
éxxAnolas KaTa TO Sedoypévorv..|..@v> Kal] ef pév tus..|.. 77 
éxx[Anoia ..|..0]@w ets .. 

,.ulloxou kal af..|..«]owat: ypadérw [8] év e[..| «Jal typ 
moaétyta Tov dopov[..|.. Tot]s te dpyovowy Kai Sexat[evtais | 
ca{t..|..] t[)]v rpdcodov ryv éx [TovT]ov cal [..||..7]a Tod 
romrov. [Anwe]re dé [U]rép éExalotov ywpiov o KatadaBor] | 


[34 5:3ea| 


15 


20 
25 
30 
35 


40 
45 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


dveow tov hopov tav mpetwv [ér]av wévt[e: eresta 5é Kal” 
éxaotov éviavtov] | dwcer Tov Popov Tov étHotov Told x |aTa- 
NauBavopu[évov ywplov Tod punvos rod] | “AXadKopevaiov [7] 
Tevtekaloex| aTn |* of dé un 1rpakeavtes a[ Tpatnyol THY Tpoco || Sov 
vrevOuvor Ecovtar av ovK é[tplazéav. Ei dé tis NaBov [év]ros 
[THs mrev]||raetias un huTevoat, TO Te Ywplov [ pe |TaTTwAHcTOVELY 
e / ] \ Ned e /, a 
ol KatarauBar[ovtes] | otparnyol (K)al Ov bréaotn Teréce[y 
/ / b] ’ a fol 2 ’ 5" id 
fo |pov rpadEovaow trap avtod ris [mevraetillas. Ei dé hutevoes 
Aaa, ) e 5 ” An / A / x ora \ \ 
év wépos os [iva] dEtov ToD dopov tav révte ét[ Ov, Tov per] | 
dopov un wpattécOw, timpackécOw [5é] TO ywpiov rodeiTn, 
Kal TO apyov Kall 76 wedu || Tevuévor, ert TO THY wev TELUNV TLOD 
/ > A “a / \ \ f \ 
w leputevpévov eicxoutcOfjvat TH Tod et, TOV] || dé Hopov twavTos 
Terelo Bar Kal’ Exacro[y] éviavtov, dcov Ter€a[e]iv Kal 0 TpoTeE- 
pols wo ||hoynoev, cuyx@poupévou TO Tptal ev |w TOU hopov THS 
, € \ ‘en AH La) id / \ € / 
mevtaetias UTép [Tov ap ||youv wovov. AauBavéra &é[o model |rns 
isd \ / / > / ba , 
Exactos un Téov TACOpa[Y.. ]+| ef wévTOL TLS Pwpalein huTeEv- 
s l / ¢ \ A ees 
aas t[ov |rows mAéov, THAHTOVELW [ol oTpaTHyol | To Bova jouévw 
TOV ToONELTOV éTL TO Kal Ex TOUTOV c@lecOaL T[H TOA || .. 
f a 4 / e 4 Creek, Cars 
hopov| TocovTov dcov tledécety] Mpmoroynoev UIrép éExdoTo[v 
/ By \ \ y ’ , \ 
mrEOpov. “Hv b€ pndels | BovrAnTat tpiacbat, mpakéove |v Tapa 
Tol[0 wpwtov AaBolvTos Tov yervouelvov Popov, | dcov bmép 
e Ig / / ¢€ / 
éxadoTou TAOpou Ter€cew VIrEdé |EaTo. | 








[.. wAé]@pov told ..|.. Jdwevos cat ..||..ov é& cov z[..|.. 
Tlapa tis Todew[s..|..]i@ Kal Ta adda xal..|.. mparT]o- 
pévov Tov phopou [..|.. wor ]eitn SavecoTH, @s xa[l..||.. Snw]o- 
ciov ywpiouv 7 o[..| S|nwociov KaW jyul..|.. alvros ypadéro 
..|..v7..0¢ €xa..|.. TWocoy 7 OT. .||..aT0s U....... | 

[.... T]o te dvopa [rlo[d ..|..] e¢ 8€ tus eEarrarjcals TH] 


operdov[twv Eéva vrrobein | te TOY Xwpiov TOlv Snpwociwy Kal 

a > / 3 / ] \ \ / Meee \ id 
TodTO éXevyGein, apaipelicOw avtov TO | xwpiov TO brroTeOer] 7 

ec \ \ ¢ / ? a bys / a 
mods, 0 b€ Savetatns o Eévos ex TOV AdALoV KTHUAGTOD || TOV 

a e / \ 7 / Ate? Va > 
Tov vob |evtos THY elomrpakiv troveicOw Tod ddetropuélvov. El 
dé tis | SiaOHx Jars Kataritror Eévp cuvyevel ) hitw TovTwr Ti 
tov [ywpiov, axupos | Ertw alvTod 7 Swped, ctw Sé THs TOAEWS 
To xwptov. Ee o[é tes un Katari|rrav dia]Onxas teNevtTHjoa, b 
py elo vopywoe KAnpovopor, [b]m[apyérw | Kat’ aud]orepa 
KANPOVomoS TOV EauTHs KTHu[LaT]os 7 TOALS. || 


[ 454 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


[Te]luivios Modectos avOtratos Orc Bléwv tots Te 55 
apxyovaot kal] TH BovaAg cat TO dHyo xalperv. ‘Ixavov 
[wev odv ..| elvar] KUpta Ta SdEavTa bpeiv wept THs TpoTe[pov 

.|.. ] yeyevnwévns, kal ro Tod a&toALoywtarov ..|..é]m [a]d- 
TOV éeTLy@plou Kal .. 

From Thisbe. Dittenberger dates the document in the beginning 
of the third century, while Rostowzew is inclined to ascribe it to 
the reign of Hadrian, or a little later. In accordance with this edict 
of the provincial governor, the public (and sacred?) lands of Thisbe 
are to be sold in small lots to the citizens of the town subject to 
the payment of an annual tax (fdpos), which, however, is to be 
remitted for the first five years of occupancy. The purchaser is 
under obligation to plant (¢vtedcav) in vineyard or orchard during 
this period. If he fails to do so, the magistrates shall sell the property 
and exact the tax for the first five years. If only a part of the land 
is brought under cultivation according to the contract, the magis- 
trates shall sell the allotment to a citizen, the price of the cultivated 
portion being paid into the treasury in lieu of the yearly tax, while 
the new purchaser shall pay the stipulated tax for the whole plot 
annually thereafter. If any farmer occupies more than the legal 
allotment, the magistrates shall sell the portion held illegally, safe- 
guarding the payment of the annual tax. If, however, a purchaser 
cannot be found, they shall exact from the first farmer the amount 
of tax which he agreed to pay for his original assignment. The 
tenant may mortgage or bequeath his holdings, but not to a non- 
resident of the city. If he dies without heirs, the property reverts 
to the city. This document belongs to the class known as vopos 
morntixos (Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 386 ff.), and the 
form of perpetual leasehold instituted in the municipal territory 
of Thisbe is similar in all respects to that prevalent in Egypt. 
Several points of interest may be noted. The magistrates (orpa- 
Tnyol) are responsible personally for the exaction of the qdpos. 
The doctrine of orzgo is implied in forbidding any lease to be granted 
to aliens, and in the restrictions applied to mortgages and bequests 
to non-residents. ‘The legislation of the governor is, furthermore, 
in the interest of the small proprietor, and every attempt is made to 
prevent the encroachment of the capitalist and his /atifundia. 


[ 4550] 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Finally, it may be noted that the central government at this period 
does not hesitate to regulate in minute detail the internal affairs of 
the municipalities in the provinces. For a discussion of the legis- 
lation regarding similar tenure of land on the imperial domains, 


cf. pp. 15 ff, and nos. go, III. 


130. EPISTULA IMPERATORUM SEVERI ET 
CARACALLAE AD TYRANOS 
(201 p. Chr.) 


CIL. ut, 781; Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 598; Bruns, 89; Dessau, 423; 
Riccobono, p. 332. 


Exemplum eptstulae ad Tertullum. 

Misimus tibi epistulam ad Heraclitum, unde tntelleges quid sta- 
tuerimus de immunitate, quam Tyrani sibi concessam contendunt. 
Quam licet admittere non soleamus nisi privile|gii auctoritate per- 
pensa et origine immu|nitatis inspecta, quod usu receptum esse qua|qua 
ratione videbatur, cum iusta moderati|one servavimus, ut neque ipsi 
consuwetudi||ne diuturna pellerentur et in posterum | decreta civium 
adsumendorum consi/7s | praesidis provinciae c(larissimi) v(irl) per- 
penderetur. | Exemplum epistulae ad Heraclitum. | Quamquam 
Tyranorum civitas orzginem || dati beneficii non ostendat, nec facile, 
quae | per errorem aut licentiam usurpata sunt, prae|scriptione 
temporis confirmentur, tamen, | quoniam divi Antonini parentis 
nostri litte/ras, sed et fratrum imperatorum cogitamus, item || 
Antonii Hiberi gravissimi praesidis, quod attinet | ad ipsos ‘T'yranos 
quique ab lis secundum leges | eorum in numerum civium adsumpti 
sunt, ex prilstino more nihil mutari volumus. Retineant | igitur 
quaqua ratione quaesitam sive possessam || privilegii causam in 
promercalibus quoque re|bus, quas tamen pristino more profes- 
sionibus | ad discernenda munifica mercimoniorum eden|das esse 
meminerint. Sed cum Illyrici fructum | per ambitionem deminui 
non oporteat, sciant || eos, qui posthac fuerint adsumpti, fructum | 
immunitatis ita demum habituros, si eos legatus | et amicus noster 
v(ir) c(larissimus) iure civitatis dignos esse de|creto pronuntiaverit, 
Quos credimus satis a|bundeque sibi consultum, si grati fuerint, 
exi||stimaturos, quod origine beneficii non quaesi|ta dignos Boab 
cives fieri praeceperimus. | 


[ 456 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


‘Oovivios TépturAros dpyxovat, Bovrns, dy|uwr Tupavav yai- 
pew. | Avtiypaghov Tov Oeiwy ypappatoy, trep||\bOévT@v jot v7rd 
TOV Kuplov nuaY avet|KnTOV Kal EVTUXETTATOV aUTOKPATOpOY, | 
TOUTOLS MoU TOS ypaupacw Tpoétaka, 6|mws yvovTes THY Oeiav 
eis Umas peyaro|Owpiay Th. weyarne avTav TUYnL evyapioT}||- 
onte. "Epp@obar vuds Kal evtuxety Twod|Aois ETEow EevYomaL. 
‘AmedoOn mpo | uy’ karavdeav Maptiwv Anvedvos 7’. |’ AvertaOn 
emt Movetavod cat DaBravod | virdtav, év Tat eptr’ Eret, || 
apyns Il. Aidttov Kadzrovpviov. 


From Tyra in Lower Moesia. Tertullus was the provincial 
governor, and Heraclitus the procurator vectigalis Illyrict. The im- 
portance of the document lies in the fact that the Trans claimed 
immunity from certain taxes, especially the portorzum (Cagnat, Les 
impéts indirects chez les Romains, 20 ff.), and, since they had been 
rather liberal in granting citizenship to aliens, the imperial revenues 
had suffered. The procurator, apparently, had complained to the 
governor and to the emperors, with the result that the Tyrans were 
asked to submit the evidence on which they based their claim of 
immunity. This they were able to do only in part, and from the 
letter of the emperors we may infer that certain cities in the empire 
had claimed similar privileges without any right to do so, These 
claims had apparently been disallowed, unless the city had been 
able to show the reason for the gift and the original charter. The 
Tyrans had only been able to produce the letters of Antoninus Pius, 
and his successors; the letters of the governor, Antoninus Hiberus, 
had also been submitted. Accordingly the emperors confirm the 
privileges which the Tyrans claim, but the grant of citizenship 
conferred by the city is hereafter subject to the approval of the 
provincial governor. Since citizenship in a community which en- 
joyed any form of immunity would be highly prized, it is probable 
that Tyra had been guilty of increasing her revenues by this means, 
Similarly Athens, enjoying the status of a free city, had bestowed 
citizenship so lightly in return for a small payment in money that 
Augustus took away the right to make the grant (cf. p. 139). 
Tarsus sold the grant of citizenship for 500 drachmae (Dio Chrys. 


345 23). 
[45 aha 


45 


Io 


5 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


131. EDICTUM LEGATI IMPERATORUM, Q. SICINI 
CLARI, DE PIZO CONDENDA 
(202 p. Chr.) 


Cagnat, JGRR. 1, 766; Ditt. Sy//.3 880; Kalinka, Ant. Denk. 
Bulgar. 34. - 


"Ayady tixn. | ‘Tarép tis Tdv weyiotov Kal OevoTdtav avTo- 
xpa|topov A, Sertipiov Leunpou eptivaxos xé M. Advpn. | 
"Avtwveivou XeBB. xé [II]. Lert. Téta Kaicapos] xé || lovrias 
Adpuvns untpos Kadotpev veikns Kal aiwviov | diapovfs Kal Tov 
cvuTavTos avToV oikov Kal tepads ouy|KAnTOU Kal Syuouv Tod 
‘Popaiwv cat iep@v otpatevpdtor, | éxticOn cata Swpedyv TOV 
Kupltwv évroptov Iifos, émt | bratev tév Kupiwv attoxpaTopwv 
A. Sem. Seounpou Tep||rivaxos xé M. Avp. ’Avtwveivov YeBB., 
Kat weTdKioay eis avTo | of UtroTeTaypmévor. | 

K (divros) Xexivycos KXapos | rpecB(euvtys) LeB(actev) avte- 
atpa|tnyos Néyet. || 

TH mpoowe: tév ctabOpov joG€[v]|tes off] Kvptor Hua@v pé- 
yeotor | Kal Oevdtator advtoxpdtopes | da mavtos Te Tod éavT@V 
aid|vos BoudnGévtes ev TH avdtH evrrpe||rreta Suapetvat THY avTOr | 
évrapxelav, tpocétakay Ta bv|Ta évirépia émipavéctepa vTap ]|- 
Ea, Kai TA ur) TROTEpoY dvTa | yevéoO[a]e* Kal yéyover. || [E]7et 
ovv Set Ta ex Ocias Swpelas oppwpeva evtuxéaTe|pa elvas Kal éx 
THS ToV éhelot@Tov TaEews, ovK évrroptlaxods SnuoTas, ara 
toTrdp||yous Boureutas éxédevoa | éxméutrecOat eis TadTa TA | 
[é]va[op]ca, Sods avtots nat 8’ émictol[Ans] onmavTipa Kai 
dixacodociayr | [kai évrei]Aas ur DBper unde Bia, || [Sera luocdvy dé 
cal evreckeia | [kp]a[t]etv rods évorxodvtas Kal | [U2 pd |vov avtovs 
tavta Tpaco|[ev, dAA]a[K]al aro TOV AAdX@V TO adsxety | v[ew- 
Te |pifeww rponpnuever pvellcO[ae xp letas Kal woduTAnOeias. | 

IIpos Tob civar evdaimovéotepa | tadta éwropia érre(t)Oounr, 
avdpalow [érc}ra[plevvetv evdoxipovryte[v] é[«] | tLav wé]orE 
Kopav, melBovtas Sé || o.. Kat petouxifer eis tad|ta [T]a év- 
Topla, Kal avTos S€ mpo|r[cO]é[wev]os kal tods Bovropévous | 
ExovTHnY TovTO TroLety &Eovtas | Oeias TUyns TaV LeBacTar || 
peydras Swpeds, Tovtéativ | ToXetTLKOD ceitov averohopiay | 
kai ovr[ter]eias Bovupyapiwyv xai| [dlpovpdv Kal dvyapevdv 


[ 458 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


aveow. | Kat tatta péev trept tis Takews || [T]od Tomapyou Kal 
mept THS aNevToup|[yno lias TOY évorxodyTaV 7 évorxn|[co]lvTHD. 
Ilept 8€ tev oixodopn|[yd]rov, bras émipereias Tuv|ydvovTa 
els del diapévor, || KeAXevw Tovs ToTapxYoUS Kal Tovs | érriaTdO- 
fous aotpatioras | [wla[p]a tév érimedntav traparal[r|B]a[ve]v 
Ta TpatT@pia Kal Ta BalNavela TavTayoOev OAOKAN||pa, TOUTET TLV 
éy Tols oikodoptxois | Kal €v Tols AeTrTOUpytKots Kai év | Tots 
Xpynatikots, mapadidovtas | tots pel éavtovs eyypad[o]s, wo- 
wep | taparxauBdvovow. [Oras S]é érru||weAectépous avTovs 
mapacKeu|dow mpos THv. mapalAnluww | Kal tHv wapddoowr, 
ml apaxe|Acv|w amo Tod ypovou THs [walparnu|pews wéexpe THs 
mapal[ doc |ea[s] || Ta brdpyovra tév ToTrdpxwvr | kal TOV apyor- 
Twv ods éxérXevoa | TO (dim KiWdvvV@ avTodrs TpoBdr|recOat, 
uTevOuva civar TO | Onwootw TAY TOAEwD, Tpds 5é S[tal|AV Jowao[e] 
avuTa Ta évtropia eis TO | [Te]TpaTAdaoLov Tod évdencor|Tos. 
From Pizus in Thrace. We have omitted in our text the names 
of the colonists who were settled in the new foundation. These are 
arranged in four columns under the villages from which they were 
drawn. In the fourth column there are nine names under the title 
vrratou oikntopes, probably one from each of the nine villages, 
who were chosen to act as magistrates in the new community 
(Seure, B.C.H. 22 (1898), 472 ff, 520 ff.). The number of colonists 
is 181. Pizus had the rank of an emporium or forum, and was 
established as a stato (ota@uos) on the imperial highway which 
led from Philippopolis towards Hadrianopolis. The edict was issued 
after a visit of the emperors to Thrace, and it apparently formed a 
model for the creation of similar stations along the highway and 
throughout the province. The settlers were drawn from nearby 
villages, and they were induced to settle in the new foundation under 
the promise of remission of various liturgies, the annona, the pro- 
vision of troops recruited for service in the durgz and garrisons, and 
angary, or the supply of animals and labor in the service of the 
public post. The residents are not called citizens but évo:xodvtes. 
The duty of administration and of dispensing justice is entrusted to 
a member of the senate from the toparchy, or administrative district 
in which Pizus is founded (cf. Cod. Th. 12. 1. 21). Apparently the 


government of fora had been given hitherto to ordinary residents 


[ 459 ] 


55 


60 


65 


70 


75 


80 


Or ke 


Io 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


of the station (ll. 25 ff.). The chief magistrate has the title rovrapyos, 
and is assisted in his administrative duties by the nine daratou 
oixn topes mentioned above. ‘These officials are responsible for the 
care of the public buildings provided by the emperors, and their 
property is held as security by the municipality or toparchy, which 
is entrusted with the administration of the station. ‘(The management 
of the buildings is shared with the troops stationed at the post, but 
the soldiers are not placed under a similar bond. On the fora in the 
Roman empire, cf. pp. 10 ff. The reading oup[ted]eéas in |. 52 
is suggested by Rostovtseff, ‘Fourn. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff, 
where he also discusses the liturgy of providing recruits for military 
service. 
132. EDICTUM IMPERATORUM SEVERI ET 


CARACALLAE DE HOSPITIO 
(204 p. Chr.) 


Lafoscade, 74; Ditt. Sy//.3 881; CIL. i, S. 14203%9; 1G. xu, 
5» 132. 

‘Tepa ypaupara. | [A]oxets jyety to Sdyua | [T]As cuvyeAnrov 
ayvo|[et]v, ds, édv wet eurrel||[p]ov cvvavTeBarnis, | [e]ione mn 
evat éerravary|[Kles cuyxrntixwe | [d]yuov “Pwpaiwy dxov|[re] 
Eévov vrobéxell[o]Oat. *ES00n | a’ car, louve. “Pépnt, | [Pa] Bior 
Kethou to 8’ cai | PA]vvios AiBou trator). | 

Sacrae /itterae<s>. | Videris obis s. co. | ignorare gui si cum | 
peritis contu/eris || scies senatori p. R. | necesse mon esse | invito 
hospitem | suscipere. | Dat. prid. kal. lun. Romae || Fabio Cilone ix 
et | 4nnio Libone coss. 

From the island of Paros. This edict was issued in answer to a 
complaint lodged by a magistrate or private citizen on the island. 
The inscription seems to have been set up on the wall of the house 
owned by the senator who claimed immunity from the service of 
lodging officials or soldiers. There is no other record of the decree 
of the senate to which the emperors refer. The liturgy of furnishing 
hospitium was most severe, and complaints of the abuses which 
were inflicted by the members of the bureaucracy and army cha- 
racterize most of the documents of the third century. Cf. nos. 113, 
139, 141-144. On the character of this document, cf. pp. 236 ff. 
On immunity, cf. pp. Io1 ff. 


[ 460 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


133. DECRETUM MYLASENSIUM DE TRAPEZITIS 
(209-211 p. Chr.) 
Hitt. Ors Garsns 


bea Basa Us ac. pier oh fr dea 'e)s\ systaenbete Ofte treed a « Foielsed tO EY 
Besa s hy S.oveT.........| THY Bovanly «jlali tov Sjpov...... 
eee Ko luv onodpova yvo[unv ....... joa BOY 
Tais vopipors nlwépars ...... rer ot Jov éravopbalca: 
Ore ere |.....] apopyrov maow dvtos Told .......].., od 


paty |nrat dé dtvac Oar tabfvat || wr]n[v] b1a [rHv 7 ov peyictov 
[xai Oesordtwy Kup|i lov judy Adtoxpatopwv Ao[uxiov Lente- 
piov Leou|y]oov EvoeBovds Leptivaxos «lal Mdpxov Adpnrlouv 
"Av|tw|vivov [EiceBots cal Homrdiov XSerripiov Téra LeBalo]- 
TOV TLYHY, Whdiopatte THs BlovARs Kal Tod Sypov ér||a vopbw- 
Gevra: Sed0yOarTHu[ BovrAni Kal THe dyn pos.’ Ea |v res ot@udnTweoby 
Tpomt, [elite EXevOepos eite | d lobNos, EEwOev Tod pewtcOwpl évov 
Kal épyallo|uévov tHv tpamelav, aperBdouer[os adau vomwiopa 
) | mpt|auevos, mpos Tov tpatreleitnv [TodTOV dyer Oar || yer jo- 
pévns Tpocavyenias THe Bovaje [vireo Tod BovAopé|vov T]dv 
TOAELTOY, Kal EXevXOevTa éex[i TOY apxyovTwy Kal | THs] Bours, 
el ev Avev KoAAVBov TodT[O érroince, TOD apyupiou | Tpaé |v 
elva TOL TpaTreCeiT HL Kal TOL pnvUac[avTe Kat édXov|TL, E]yovTos 
TOU Tpameteitov Kai Kat avTov éfo[vaiay mpdatte||cOat xa |0a 
nopariotat, ef dé emi KoAAV Pat, TOY [ev EXEVPEpov atro|Tiver |v 
(e)is TO fepmtatov Tapeiov Tév Kupioly nudv OevoTa|twy | avTo- 
Kpatopov & ’, rau bé Snot & ov’, «Lai rae wnvd|cavt |exat érovre 
% p', cal To hdwpabey apyvpod[y vowio|ua mp laccopevor eivar 
oTEepéotpmov Ta TpaTreCe[itHL* TOV 5é SovAIlov Ed JevyDevTa ws Tpo- 
yéypartat, mapadobér[ta dé vd Tod Sea|7dToUu] Tois apyouce 
érrt [TH ]s Bovrrjs, pacteryovabals v' mAnYyas | Kal] EeuBdrreabar 
(e)is TO mpaxtopevov Kal eivas [adtov | él] THs (e)ipKeTHS Tac- 
copevov phnvas E> éav Sé [6 deotroTns pn | Troe|no[e]ve TadTa 
Tov SovAov, odeirery avTov Ta [yeypaupéva || éri|reswa ToL 
lepwTatat Tapelor Kal Tat Oyj pos [Kal TOL wnvicarTs Kal | Ed6 Jute. 
Tas dé tovavtas mpocavyenias cicdé[yecOat Tov ypapyparéa | 
Tov] apxYovTav, yevouevns meTa TO eTrLd[oOAvaL THY Tpoc|avye- 
N]iav mpoypadys épeEns eal tpets nué[pas ev tepois | Kal dn]- 
Moc tols TOToLS, pNTas THS Tpoypadhs [Aeyovans Ore || cuvay jeras 


[ 461 ] 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


390 


a2 


40 


45 


50 


35 


60 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


» Bourn S1a Tovto. ‘Eav dé ot apyovte[s 1) 0 ypaupateds | Tar 
én |btopévor Te Taparitwow 1 of Bovrevtal [un cvv| éXOw ow 
Suvatol dvTes Kal érridnmot, Tovs wev [apxovTas Kai | Tov ypap]- 
paréa atroteioas ExaoTov avtav (eis TO [tepw@ratoy Tapetor | Tdv 
LeBalorav avaX 7’, rovs d€ Bovrevtas [ava & .. avaypal|rar Se 
TO de TO Wndiopa év-oTyrn!L, Hy Kal avalotaOjvar | Senoes ev THe] 
ayopas ev THL ETLINMOTATwL TOTMwL, Wal TEP VOmOY Els TOY Tav|Ta 
ypovo |v KaTagTHaOV' canrever yap ws ady[Ods 1% cwTnpia | THs 
TOE |ws €k Kakoupyias Kal Travoupyias ori[yov Tidy | adThe 
érewBalwvovtav Kai atovoodilopévwr tla Kxowwa, bv vt || THS 
Suva jews KOANUBOS Tus EvTrehoitynKev eis [THY ayopay, | KwoNV@V 
Tv 176 |NLY Ta EerreTHO(E)La EXELY, ATTopovVTwY [TeV ToAA@Y | Kal 
Tov Kowod o|ravifovtos. Kat dvd rovto Kal 4 ev[mopta 1) | mpos 


\ / > / A / / 

Tous Kupious av|toxpatopas Tay hopwyv Bpadvve. ......... | 
De ti Ur tre et bar LEYAANS Hyewovias TOUTO TaGa 1).... 
at Se AR SP EA ee a EELS émavopOacat. Succlam(atum) est. 
(Hyistas@l vars) hustle Rchpices aA tay: J@v averxntois Tots Ku- 
plows, vaois’[.....* booed Oe KOrXA |uBov. To Env ov« Exouer, 
> + ee 4 / / / > 

GNXN  md[Aus .....--- Ba ar. .. movn |pevouevol tives év7ro- 
pelas tap[accovow Kat | TO voutopa.... love TO apyupodr, 
ROU TOUTO |. sees ear utr aa 45 ee T ]ovs vopouvs ToAAaKLS 1) 
POL VAT aioe t 87% es Fs scorer. 5 lion. $502. }eqroNeony eee ee 


From Mylasa. As was the case at Pergamum (cf. no. 81), 
Mylasa derived a certain revenue from the exchange of local and 
foreign currency. The right of exchange was leased to a firm of 
bankers. Apparently private individuals had also engaged in the 
business to such an extent that trade had been demoralized and the 
revenues of the municipality seriously impaired. ‘The document is 
of interest because the fines and penalties are imposed by the city, 
and the local magistrates and senate administer the law. This is 
the latest evidence for the independent powers of municipal govern- 
ments in initiating legislation in the imperial period (cf, Mommsen, 
Rém. Strafrecht, 114). Vhe court is constituted by the magistrates 
and senate of the city. The secretary is empowered to summon the 
court on giving three days’ notice. A fine, payable to the imperial 
fiscus, is imposed on any member of the court who fails to attend the 
session when he is able to do so, 


Reinach (B.C.H. 20 (1896), 523 ff-) offers the following ex- 
[ 462 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


planation of the monetary crisis. “he municipal laws probably 
required the use of local coinage in the transaction of business within 
the city. As at Pergamum the rate of exchange was fixed, With the 
rapid depreciation of imperial coinage, traders and speculators 
purchased the undepreciated local currency and by holding it or 
by hoarding, it disappeared from circulation. There was a consequent 
rise in local prices and trade was seriously hampered. The law 
attempted to remedy conditions by confining all transactions in 
exchange to the municipal bank or to the firm which leased the 
privilege of exchange from the city (cf. nos. 81, 199). 


134. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS CARACALLAE 
AD PHILADELPHENOS 
(213-214 p. Chr.) 


Ditt. Sy//.3 883; Lafoscade, 78; Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1619. 

"Avtwvelvos o exile. | Avtoxpatwp | Kaicap Mapxos | 
Adpnrwos Avtawveil|vos EiceBns SeBac|tos LlapOsxds péyeo|Tos 
Bpetavyrxes pé|yrotos Veppavixds | wéysotos Avpnrtat || ‘To[v- 
Mave |e TA Tims|@Tata@s yaiperv. | Ei Kal pdeis aipe? | Aoyos 
tov DiraderA|péa ‘Jovrcavov allo tév Yapdvavar | ets tHv THs 
matpi|dos weTabeivar pi|AoTEmiay, AAr’ Spas | onv yap 7déas || 
TOUTO TroL@, Ov dv Kat | THY VewKopiav avd|Tnv Tots Pidader| hed- 
a[wv dé |dwxa. |”"Eppwco lovaAc[ave]|| tows@taré wou cal pir|Tare. | 
"AveyvoaOn év tat | Oedtpws EtTovs cue’, wy|vos “AmreAXaiov €’. 

From Philadelphia. The letter is addressed to Aurelius Julianus 
who must not be confused with the Julianus about whom the 
letter is written. The latter was a native of Philadelphia who had 
become a resident of Sardis. Apparently he wished to undertake 
some liturgy for his native city—possibly in connection with the 
imperial cult—when the Sardians protested. Their motive was 
doubtless due to the rivalries and civic jealousies which so thoroughly 
inspired many of the cities of Asia under Roman rule. The Sardians 
had no legal claim to the exclusive services of Julianus, for by law 
the city of his birth took precedence over his place of residence 
(Dig. 50. 1. 1, 6, 16, 173 Cod. F. 10. 39. 1). When the Phila- 
delphians took up the dispute with the emperor he replied that he 
would gladly fulfil the request of his friend Julianus, even if he had 
no legal right to do so. 


[ 463 ] 


20 
25 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


135. TABULA PATRONATUS 
(222 p. Chr.) 

CIL. vi, 1454; Dessau, 6109. 

Imp. Caes. M. Aur. Severo Alexandro | cos. eidib. Aprilibus | 
concilium conventus Cluniens. | G. Marium Pudentem Cornelia-|| 
num leg. leg., c. v., patronum | sibi liberis posterisque suis | co- 
optavit ob multa et egregia | eius in singulos universos|que merita, 
per legatum || Val. Marcellum | Cluniensem. 

Bronze tablet found at Rome. The patron in this case, Cor- 
nelianus, a /egatus legionis, belongs, as most patrons do, to the 
senatorial order. In Pliny’s time Hispania Citerior was divided into 
seven conventus (N.H. 3. 3. 18), one of which had its seat at Clunia; 
cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 805, 11773; Schulten, R.F. 8, 2037. The 
election of a patronus by this conczlium conventus seems to show that 
the conventus of Hispania Citerior was a political as well as a judicial 
division of the province. For a general treatment of the conczlia, 
cf. pp. 162 ff. 

136. ALBUM DECURIONUM 
(223 p. Chr.) 

CIL. 1x, 338; Dessau, 6121. 

L. Mario Maximo II, L. Roscio Aeliano cos., 

M. Antonius Priscus, L. Annius Secundus rtvir. quinquenn. 
nomina decurionum in aere incidenda curaverunt. 


patroni cc. vv.: quinquennalicii: aedilicii: 
App. Claudiu s Iulianu s TT. Ligeriu s Postuminu s T. Flavius Crocalianu s 
T. Loreniu s Celsu s TT. Annaeu s Rufu s (et alia nomina duo- 
M. Aediniu s Iulianu 8s L.Abucciu s Proculu = s deviginti, in his) 
L. Didiu s Marinu s ‘T.Aeliu 8s Rufu 8 L. Faeniu s Merop s iun. 
(et alia nomina viginti T. Aeliu os Flavianu = s quaestoricii: 

septem, in his) M. Antonius Priscu 8 L. Ceius Asclepiodotianu s 

M.Statiu s Longinu s L.Anniu' s Secundu s (et alia nomina octo) 


C. Petroniu s Magnu s 


M. Statiu s Longinusiun. C.Galbiu  s Soterianu s Q. Fabius Fabianu s 
patroni eeqq. RR.: L. Abucciu s Iulianu 8 (et alia nomina tri- 
P. Gerellanu s Modestu s_ C. Siliu s Anthu s ginta et unum) 
T. Ligeriu s Postuminus P.Aeliu ss Victorinu§ s praetextati: 
T. Munatiu s Feli x I1viralicii: T. Flavius Frontinu s 
T. Flavius Crocalianus A. Caesellius Proculu su C.JIuliu  s Hospitalis iun. 
C.Galbiu  s Soterianu s  L.Faeniu  s Merop sir L.Abuccius Proculu s iun. 
T. Aeliu s Rufu s L.Abucciu s Maximianu s (et alia nomina vi- 
T. Aeliu s Flavianu s Q.JIuniu- s Alexande ri ginti duo) 
Q. Coeliu Sabinianu  s (et alia nomina viginti 
quingue) 
[ 464 ] 


allecti inter quingq.: 


pedani: 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


A bronze tablet found at Canusium, now in Florence. Such 
lists were drawn up by the quinquennales. ‘The regulations governing 
the revision of the list were usually stated in the /ex municipit. For 
the early period, cf. no. 24, ll. 83 ff In the later period the inter- 
ference of the emperor is evident (Dig. 50. 3. 2, qui dignitates prin- 
cipis tudicto consecuti sunt). Chis album shows the normal number of 
one hundred decurions (cf. no. 151). In it also appear the names of 
thirty-nine patroni and twenty-five praetextati. In the album of 
Thamagudi (CIL. vit, 2403; S. 17824; Dessau, 6122), of the 
middle of the fourth century, there are twelve patroni and fifty- 
nine decurions, and of the decurions a majority have been flamines 
perpetut, 1.e. they have been priests of the imperial cult and conse- 
quently officially connected with the central government (Jullian, 
Dict. Dar. s.v. flamen, pp. 1180 ff.). On M. Aedinius Julianus in the 
album of Canusium, cf. no. 140. On patronz, cf. nos. 42 and 135. 
The groups of active decurions are arranged in the order of their 
rank. At the end come the pedani who have held no magistracy, 
and the praetextatz, who were probably, for the most part, sons of 
decurions. However, all the sons of regular decurions cannot have 
been of age to wear the praetexta. Consequently the decurionship 
cannot have become hereditary as early as a.p. 223. Otherwise the 
names of minors would naturally appear in the list (Mommsen, 
Festschrift xu Hurschfeld, 4). “Vhe acceptance of the hereditary 
principle probably became the usage in the times of Diocletian and 
Constantine. It is explicitly laid down as a principle (Mommsen, 
op. cit. 5, n. 4) by Theodosius in Cod. Th. 12. 1. 20: Is vero ratio 
diversa est qui statim ut nati sunt curtales esse coeperunt. One group, 
whose presence in the album of Thamagudi a century and a half 
later and whose absence here is significant of a decline in municipal 
prosperity and of a desire to avoid the burdens which were being 
laid on the decurions as time went on, is that of the excusatz. ‘They 
were excused from the munera of the office. On the munera, cf. 
pp. 84 ff; ‘The name of C. Petronius Magnus has been erased from 
the album, but may still be read. Dessau conjectures that he was 
put to death by Maximinus; cf. Herodian, 7. 1. 5; Hust. Aug. 
Maximin. 10. 1. 


AMA [ 465 ] a 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


137. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE AD APHRODISIENSES 
(222-235 p. Chr.) 


Rev. d. é. grec. 19 (1906), 86 f. 


.evT|uxets Syr[Ladn a]eorovdov éo[ts | maalas moneus Tas 
5 Kadworwpévas | [T]7 weyadryn adtod TUXYN purely Te || Kal TELMar, 
Omep pe Toveiv Hdéws | K[a]l avTol tote, éEaipérws Sé Tas 
tet|unBelcas TH édevOepia bd THY Tpolyovev ToD KUploV HUOV 
10 avtoxpatopo[s] | (AreEavdpov) BeBaobytos avto[d || avt]nv 
cal av€ovtos Ta Sixata oi[s | evOu|ucioBe kal 7déws EAXevoopal. | 
mpos] buds Kat éridnunow év TH Nap|[rpot |atn ToNEL Du@V Kat 
Th Tatpia vor | [Oca] Ovcw brép Te THS GwTnpias Kal aiall- 
15 [v]tov dvapovits Tod Te Kuplov nua@v av|toxpatopos (’AreEdvdpov) 
Kal Ths Kup|[tas] yuav LeBaoths (Mapaias) untpos | Tod Kuptov 
20 MOV Kal oTpaToTrébay, | Ec pujTE VOpoS THS TOAEWS Var || [w|nTE 
Soyua ouverntov pynte Ssdtaléis ponte Oeia érriatodr K@dVEL 
tov | [alv@v7atov émidnuety TH moder [tua]. | [E]? ydp te 
KwAvEL TOY Tpoyeypalupévar], | OUwv, ws Eos pot éotiv, Tots 
25 [adraus || Oe lots vrép te THS TUYNS Kall cwTnpias | Kal aiwviou 
diamovns Tov Ku[piov nur] | avtoxpatopos (AreEavdpov) [Kal 
Ths] | wntpos avtod (Mapaias) YLeBacrils, xupias] | dé judr, 
30 Kal THY TaTpLov Kuov [Oeav éy||x ladécouar. Tadra O€ amexpi- 
[vauny..|.... Tots MpwTots THS Naumpotdrns || budv ores. | 

[ Eppac ]Oat vuds edvyopar. 


Since Aphrodisias was a civitas libera, whose privileges had been 
confirmed and extended by Alexander (1. 10), it could not be sub- 
jected to the expense of entertaining the provincial governor and 
his staff. In free towns this immunity was secured either by the 
municipal laws, a decree of the senate, or an imperial edict or letter 
(Il. 18-22). The governor is evidently Sulpicius Priscus (cf. no. 138). 
‘The name of the emperor has been erased on the stone. 


[ 466 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


138. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(222-235 p. Chr.) 

Rev. d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 84. 

‘O dfpos | THs Naptrpotarns | "Adpodeotéwy | 7rOkews Lovd- 
mix.ov || Ipetoxov tov dialonuortatoy avOvu|ratov Kata Tas Tod | 
peyiotou Kat Gevo|ratov Kxupiov nav || ad’ToKpatopos Yeou|[7 |oov 
(AnreEavdpov) [évrords (?) ]. 

This inscription was recorded on the base of a statue set up in 
honor of the governor. The name of the emperor had been erased 
in antiquity. Although the restoration of the last word is un- 
certain, it is clear that the Aphrodisians had asked the emperor for 
permission to erect this statue. Augustus forbade provincials to 
pass honorary decrees for a governor until sixty days after his 
departure from his office (cf. p. 164). The erection of an honorary 
statue to provincial officials seems to have required special per- 
mission, but this is the only example in Greek lands known to us. 


139. RESCRIPTUM GORDIANI AD SCAPTOPARENOS 
(238 p. Chr.) 
CIL. 11, S. 12336; Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 674; Ditt. Syl? 888; 
Riccobono, p. 371; Girard, p. 205. 


Bona Fortuna. Fulvio Pio et Pontio Proculo cons. xvir kal. 
lan. descriptum et recognitum factum | ex “bro /bellorum re- 
scriptarum a domino n(ostro) imp. Caes. M. Antonio Gordiano 
Pio Felice Aug. | et propositerum Romae in porticu thermarum 
Traianarum in verba q(uae) i(nfra) s(cripta) s(unt); | dat(um) per 
Aure(lium) Purrum mil(item) coh(ortis) x pr(getoriae) P(tae) 
F(elicis) Gordianae Proculi convicanum et conpossessorem. 


5 
IO 


Avtoxpdtops Kaicaps M. ’Avtaviw | Vopdiavd EvoeBet 1 


na / \ lal an n 
Eirvye? LEB. dénous | Tapa kountov XKarToTapnvov TOV Kal | 
[Tpnoetav: €v tots evtuyeotatos Kai aiwvio || cod Katpois 
KatouKetoOar Kat BedtLlodcPa Tas Kapas Hrep avactatous | 
ylyverOat Tovs évorkodvTas TOAAA|K(ts) avTéyparras: Eat ye 
kal émt TH TOV | avOpeTav cwTnpia TO ToLodTO Kal éri || TOD 
£ / / > / c/ \ > bert e 
lepwratouv cou Tapelou wereia. |“Orep kal avtol évvopov ike- 
atav | TH Oecdtnti cov mpockopil flower, ed|yopevos iAéws érre- 


[ 467 ] 30-2 


Io 





15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


a) 


60 


65 


7O 


75 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


vedoar huety | Seopévors Tov Tporrov Todtov. Oixodl|uev Kat 
KexTnweOa ev TH Tpoyeypau|uévn KON OvVoN eveTTepaoT@ Sia 
TO | yew vdatav Oepudv yphow Kal Kei|cOat wécov dvo0 aTpaTo- 
Tédov Tav dv|tav év TH of Opakn: Kal ef’ ov pév TO || Tad(A)at 
of KatTovKodyTes aoyAnToL | Kal aderdceraToL Euevor, avevdeas | 
Tous Te ddpous Kal Ta Aowtra | émuTayuwaTa ouVeTédovY* ETrEl OE 
kata Katpovs eis | [U]B[ps|y mpoxywpety tives nal Brateo Oar || 
npEavTo, ThviKadTa éXaTTodabat | Kal 7) Kon HpEatTo. “Aro ye 
petriov | dvo THs KOuNS HudY Travnyvpews | ErLTEAOUpEVNS dLa- 
Bonrov oi éxeice | THs Tavnyvpeas eiveev érriOnpmodr||TEs NuEepas 
mTevTexaloeca €v TH | TOT@ THs Tavnyvpews ov KaTapé|vovow, 
ANN’ atroduptravoytes érrép|yovtar els THY HueTépay KoOunV | Kal 
avayKkafovow ads Eevias || avtols wapéyew Kal étepa TAcioTa 
eis | dvdAnurpiy advtav dvev apyupiou xo|pnyetiv: mpos Sé TovTaLs 
Kal otpati@tat | adAaxXod Teumopevor KaTAaNLuTa|vovTEs TAs 
idStas odovds pos Huds Tallpayelvovtat Kal duolws KaTeTretyouat | 
Tapéxew avtois tas Eevias cat ta ériltidia pndepiay Tony 
kataBanrovtes: | eridnpotar 8& ws emt TO reloTov | dia THY 
TOV vdaTwoV XYphow ol TE iHyoUl|wevor THS émapyias, GAXA Kal of 
émt|tpomrot cov: Kal Tas pev eEovaias ov|v(ey)éotata Sexyspueba 
Kata TO avayKaior, | Tods (Se) Aourrods brrodépery uty Svvapev| oe 
eveTUYOMEV TAELTTAKIS TOIS HryellUdcL THS Opaxns, oitives axo- 
Aovdws | tais Oeiaus évTodais éxédevoav doxrr|Tous Huas elvat* 
eonocapev yap pn|xéte Huds Sivacbar bropéverv, dd|AA Kal 
voov éyew évykataditrety Kal Tovs || matp@ous Gewertous Sia THY 
Tov | érepyouevor nueiv Biav: Kat yap | ds ddnOds aid TOANOY 
oixodeoT0|T@Y eis ENaxioToUs KaTeANAVOa|uev. Kal ypove wév 
Tie iaxvoev || TA Tpoctaypata TaV Hyoupévav | Kat ovdels 
nuwety evoxdnoev ovte | Eevias [airy ]uarte ode rapoxns éu|rn- 
delwv, mpoidvtwy S& Tav ypovev | wddw éroOunoar éripverbat 
H\lmety TAcioToL Boot THs idiwTias | j\udv Katadpovodytes. "Exrel 
obv ov|xéte Suvdueba hépew ra Bapn | kal ws adrnOds Kivdv- 
vevopuev Orrep | of Aourrol [d5]de Kal rpets mporTrety || TOUS 7Tpo- 
yovixovs OeuedLous, Tov| Tov ydpwy Sedpueba cou, avixnte| SeBacté, 
(d)7ws Ova Oelas cov avtiypaldfs Kereton(s) &xactov thy iSlav 
to|peverOar oddov Kai pt) drrorumdvovtas || adtods Tas ddXas 
Konas ep nuas | épyerOar pire katavayKatew | judas yopnyetv 


[ 468 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


avTois mpoika Ta | émriTndia, ddAa pNdée Eeviav advrois | Tapéxesv 
ois un é€otiv dvayxn—OTe || yap of Hryotpmevot mrEovaKts éxé|- 
Aevoav pn Adrois trapéxecOar Eelviav ef pn Tots bd Tov 
nyoupélvov Kal émitpoT@v trep|Topévols els UMNpeciay, édv Te || 
/ / 3 \ lal 2 ie \ / / \ 
Bap[@ |wePa, bevEducba aro Tar | oikeiwv Kal weytorny Enuiav TO | 
val i / > / \ \ F 
Tapetov TepLBANOnceTar— iva | érenOévtes Sid TV Oelav cov | 
mpovorav Kal peiva(vte)s év || Tots idtous TOUS TE Lepovs Pdpous | 
Kal Ta NOTA TerX<opaTa Trapéexey | SvYnaomeba? cUpBHoeETAL 
5é | todTo nyueiv ev Tols evTUYerTa|ToLs Gou KaLpols, éay KEdEv- 
ons || Ta Ocia cov ypadupata év oty|dyn avaypadévta Sypooia 
1(p)o|xetoOa, va TovTou TuxovTes | TH TUYN Tov YapLY opo- 
Aoyeiv | SuvnaoucOa, ws Kal viv Ka.. .||\opevoe cod TroLodper. | 
Atoryévns 0 Tuptos 0 ml paypa|tixds ] aro Ocias diravOpe|tias 
Sadie, 2s 4 / b / A / lal 
emt thy évtevéw tav|tnv édnrvbev: Soxel Oé || poe Gedy Tis 
mpovonaacbar | THs mapovons afioaews: | TO yap TOV BeLvoTaTov 
avto|kpatopa trept TovTav méu|rar THv idiavy yvdow ért || oé, 
o[v] 7de[e] A[S]y POdcarvta | wepi TovTov Kal mpoypapu|wacw 
kat Svataypacw | dedwxévat, TovTo éuol SolKet THs ayabhs 
ti / s = be C53 gf PS ws / e fa) @ 
tuys Epryov || etvar. “H(v) d€ 1) a€i@ous: 4 Kw| un 7) ToD BonOov- 
pévou otpaltu@tou éot[iv] év TO KadrliloT@ THs TodELTias THs 
nue|Tépas Tav Ilavtadiwrav || Kecwévn, KaX@S ev TOV Oper | 
kal tov Tediwv éxovca, | mpds 5é TovTOLS Kal Dep|udv WdaTwY 
\ > / \ \ bY) \ \ ¢ / \ / 
AouTpa ov polvov pos Tppyny GNX Kat || dyetav Kal Oeparrecay | 
copatov éritndeorata, | TAnciov S€ Kai travyyupis | ToNNAKLS 
pev ev TO ETeL | cvvayopuévn, Trept Sé [x ]a[A]. || “OxrapBpias 
\ 3 / c A b) / / / % 
kal eis TevTe|Kaideca juepav at[érevay |: | cumBEBnxev Tolvuv Ta 
fa) nA A / 
Soxodv|ta THs Kopns TavTNS TeovlexTHpaTA TO Ypove Tepil|- 
/ Cr: > b] / ‘A P) \ \ \ / 
ernrvbévar avths eis €ALat|t ]Ouata: dia yap Tas | mpoeipnuévas 
ravtas | mpohaces moAXol TodAd|Kis oTpaTL@TaL éveTLdy||- 
poovtes Tals Te émi€evo|ocor Kai Tats Bapnoeow | évoynrovat 
Thy Kopnv: | dua TavTas Tas aitias Tpd|Tepov av’THY Kal Tdov- 
oto\\Tépav Kal todvavOparror | [uadXov] odcav vov eis éoya| THV 
amopiav éknrvOéva. | “Enel tovtwv édeyOn|cav moddraKis Kal 
Tov Hyoulluévorv, adda Kal péxpis Tilvds loyvoev avToY Ta | 
TpocTaypata, weTa dé | TadTa KaTwrvywpnOy | dua THY cvVyAOELav 
Ths || rovadtns evoxAnaews: | dua TODTO avayKaiws Kat|épuyov érrl 
Tov Oevoratoy | [avtoxpatopa. . 


[ 469 | 


80 


85 


go 


II5 


I20 


125 


130 


135 


140 


145 


150 


155 


IV 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Imp. Caesar M. Antonius Gordianus Pius Felix Aug. uzkanis 
per Pyrrum mil(item) conposses|sorem: id genus quaerellae prae- 
cibus intentum ange iustitia praesidis | potius super his quae adlega- 
buntur instructa discinge guam rescripto principali | certam formam 
reportare debeas. Rescripsi. Recognovi. Signa. 


From Scaptopara in Thrace. The village was within the territory 
of the city Pataulia. The residents of Scaptopara had frequently 
complained to the governors of Thrace of the exactions made by 
soldiers, visitors, and especially officials of the province who de- 
manded the right of being entertained at the expense of the com- 
munity, although an imperial edict had exempted them from the 
liturgy of hospitium, or of furnishing supplies except on a requisition 
from the governor or procurator. This edict had been respected for 
a time, but the exactions had been renewed; the residents of Scapto- 
para had been reduced from affluence to poverty, and now threaten 
to abandon their property with consequent loss to the imperial 
treasury. After appealing in vain to the provincial authorities, the 
villagers presented their petition direct to the emperor through one 
of their number, Pyrrhus, who is also called a member of the 
praetorian cohort. He was probably a veteran who, on his discharge, 
had taken up his residence in this village. The emperor replied that 
petitions of this kind should be directed to the provincial governor, 
and Pyrrhus was sent back to this official with a copy of the petition 
and a recommendation to the governor that he enforce the edicts 
(ll. 110 ff). The action taken by the authorities is indicated in the 
statement of Diogenes, although the villagers did not take the trouble 
to engrave the whole of his letter upon the stone. It is therefore 
impossible to determine the nature of the remedies promised, but 
the answer must have been satisfactory or it would not have been 
engraved on stone. 

The position held by Diogenes is uncertain. The editors of the 
inscription have restored w[payuatixds] in 1. 101 but it is also 
possible to restore 7[payywatevtys], which is a Greek rendering of 
the Latin actor (Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, 1, 281). The term 
m[paypatixos] is extremely rare in Greek inscriptions, and is 
found only in Magnesia where the magistracy was apparently im- 
portant (Kern, Inschriften von Magnesia, 189). Diogenes, however, 


[ 470 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


was a l’yrian and probably an imperial freedman in charge of the 
imperial estates in Thrace. If we restore m[payuarevrns] as the 
title of Diogenes, we must assume that Scaptopara formed part of 
an imperial property within the territory of Pataulia. Cf. no. go 
where the estates of Hipparchus had been confiscated by the em- 
peror and held for a time before being sold. Thus imperial estates 
might exist even within the territory of a free city. It is evident 
that the Pataulians were not concerned in the petition in any way, 
and Scaptopara acted on its own initiative without reference to the 
municipal authorities within whose territory the village lay. On 
the other hand the villagers do not call themselves tenants of the 
emperor, but property-owners in their own right, and Pyrrhus is 
styled as a compossessor. It is possible that the imperial estates in 
Thrace were organized on a different basis from those in other 
parts of the empire. In |. 116 Scaptopara is called the village of the 
soldier Pyrrhus and it is possible that he held some sort of a grant 
as a reward for his military service. In Il. 10 and 86 the villagers 
call attention to the peril of the imperial fscus which was threatened 
if further exactions were permitted. In this respect the complaint 
is similar to the petitions from Asia which clearly come from im- 
perial estates (cf. nos. 113, 141-144, Bruns, 93). In ll. 3 ff of the 
petition the villagers appeal to the emperors recalling their great 
concern in the depopulation and desertion of village-communities 
which they had already observed and had attempted to remedy by 
their edicts. For the interpretation of the terms rescripst, recognovt, 
see pp. 242 ff. 

Rostovtseff has recently put forward a new and interesting theory 
concerning the policy of the imperial government in the third 
century towards the municipalities and villages of the empire (AZus. 
Belge, 27 (1923), 233 ff.). In his opinion the reigns of Commodus 
and Septimius Severus marked a struggle, not between the imperial 
power and the senate, but between the army and the wealthier 
classes in the municipalities. The edict of Caracalla aimed at a 
political and social levelling of the classes. “The emperor Maximinus, 
chosen by the soldiers, acted as their representative in systematically 
persecuting the privileged classes especially in the municipalities, 
and the counter-revolution provoked in Africa was led by the 


[S47] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


proprietors or wealthy residents of the towns. The army and the 
military emperors had one aim—the levelling, politically, socially, 
economically, and intellectually, of the privileged classes. One of 
the prime factors in this policy was the change in the character of 
the army at the end of the second century. The citizen-soldiery 
had disappeared, and the army was composed largely of peasants 
drawn from provinces least Romanized or Hellenized, and the 
troops were conscripted largely from the most warlike and least 
civilized classes, 

The peasants resident in the country villages (pagant) were 
usually despised by the urban population and regarded, not as 
members of the body politic, but as subjects to be exploited. In the 
second century the emperors sought to create a sturdy class of 
peasantry in order to strengthen the dying municipalities. “hey 
only succeeded in intensifying the antagonism of town and country 
and in making the peasant realize his importance, for he now re- 
garded the emperor as his protector against the urban population. 
Moreover the peasant now had the army to enforce his will. 

Rostovtseff finds proof of his argument in the number of petitions 
addressed by villagers direct to the emperor instead of to the pro- 
vincial governor. Almost all of these complaints are directed against 
the system of requisitions and contain accusations charging the 
governors with indifference to the interests of the people. Finally, 
most of the appeals were transmitted by soldiers. 

While the author promises fuller proof of his theory in a forth- 
coming work, the evidence seems to contradict the main points of 
his argument. In the third century most, if not all, complaints of 
this character come from tenants on imperial estates, not from 
municipal villages, and are directed for the most part against the 
very soldiers who are supposed to have the interests of the peasants 
at heart. Besides the soldiers, the chief offenders are the imperial 
agents who might naturally be supposed to represent the policy of 
the government in their treatment of the provincials. In view of 
the fact that the provincial governors were powerless to control 
the undisciplined bands of soldiers scattered throughout their dis- 
trict, the tenants on imperial estates would naturally direct their 
appeals to the emperor when they found that the governors were 


[ 472 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


powerless or incompetent, or even conniving with other imperial 
agents in illegal acts. 

While we would agree with Rostovtseff in his claim that the army 
and military leaders exploited the wealthier classes, we believe that 
this was done through no higher motive than the need of raising 
money to replenish an exhausted treasury and to support a greedy 
and clamorous army. There does not seem to be any evidence for 
the theory that the army or the emperors were concerned in the 
elevation of the peasantry as a means of supporting the city or 
infusing new strength into the municipalities. The foundations in 
the early part of the second century were devoted to checking the 
decline in native stock, but the charitable endowments were neither 
far-reaching nor widely extended geographically, and most of them 
must have been dissipated as a result of the depreciation of money 
and the ravages of civil wars. In the third century the records of 
legislative achievement have disappeared for the most part, butthe 
general tendency of the peasant class was not in the direction of 
social or economic regeneration but rather downward, for the 
agricultural laborer appears in the legislation of Constantine bound 
by laws which regard him as a virtual serf. To attribute to the 
peasants of the empire anystirring of class-consciousness is anachron- 
istic. 

140. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(238 p. Chr.) 

CIL. x11, 3162; Desjardins, Géographtie de la Gaule romaine, 3, 

planches vit, vir, Ix. 


I 
Tito) Sennio Sollemni, Sollem|nini fil(io), duumvir(o)...| (de- 
ficiunt tres versus) | ...genus spec|taculorum. . .gladia|.. .quibus 
per qua|...mission. . .| (deficiunt tres versus) Cons...| in perp... 


staur. . .Sollemnis, || amicus Tib(erii) Claud(ii) Paulin(i), leg(ati) 
Aug(usti) pro pr(aetore) pro|vinc(iae) Lugd(unensis) et cliens fuit; 
cui, postea, | /eg(ato) Aug(usti) pr(opraetore) in Britan(nia), ad 
legionem sex(tam) | adsedit, guique et salarium militiae | zn auro 
aliaque munera longe pluris misszt. || Fuit cliens probatissimus 
Aedinii Luliani, | leg(ati) Aug(usti) prov(inciae) Lugd(unensis), qui 
postea praef(ectus) praet(orio) | fuit, sicut epistula, quae ad latus 


[ 473 ] 


20 


25 


30 


Io 


5 


20 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


scripta est, | declaratur; adsedit etiam, in provincia Num(idia) | 
Lambense, M(arco) Valerio Floro, trib(uno) mil(itum) leg(ionis) 
tertiae Aug(ustae), || iudici arcae ferrar(iarum). | TRES PROVINCIAE 
GALLIAE | primo umquam, in sua Civitate, posuerunt. | Locum ordo 
Civitatis Viducass(ium) liber(ae) d(e)d(it). | P(ositum) decimum 
septimum k/(alendas) Ian(uarias), Pio et Proculo || co(n)s(ulibus). | 
I 

Exemplum epistulae Cl(audii) | Paulini, leg(ati) Aug(ust1) 
pr(o)pr(aetore) prov(inciae) | Britanniae, ad Sennium Sol/em|nem, 
—a Tampio. || “ Licet plura merenti, tibi, haec, | a me, pauca tamen, 
quoniam | honoris causa offeruntur, | velim accipias libenter: | 
chlamidem Canusinam, || dalmaticam Laodiceam, fibulam | auream, 
cum gemmis, rachanas | duas, tossiam Brit(annicam), pellem vitw/z | 
marini.—Semestris autem epistulam, | ubi propediem vacare coe- 
perzm, || mittam, culus militiae salarium, | zd est; sestertium viginti 
quingue millia n(ummum), in auro, suscipe. | Dis faventibus et 
maiestate sancta | zmp(eratoris), deinceps, pro meritis | adfectionis 
magis digna || consecuturus. Concordia.” | 

III 

Exemplum epistul(ae) Aedinzz | Iuliani, praefecti praet(orio), | 
ad Badium Comnianum, pro|cur(atorem) et vice<s> praesidis agen- 
t(em). || “‘Aedinius Lulianus, Badio | Comniano, sa(lutem).—In 
provincia | Lugduness(i), quinque fascal(ia) | cum agerem, pleros- 
q(ue) bonos | viros perspexi, inter quos || Sollemnem istum, oriun- 
dum | ex civitate Viduc(assium), sacerdotem, | quem, propter 
sectam, gravitat(em) | et honestos mores, amare coepz. | His accedit 
quod, cum Cl(audio) Pauling, || decessori meo, in Concilio | Gal- 
liarum, instinctu quorundam, | qui, ab eo, propter merita sua, laed: | 
videbantur, quasi ex consensu provinc(iae), | accussationem instituere 
tentarent, || Sollemnis iste meus proposito eorum | restitit, provo- 
catione scilicet interpo|sita, quod patria eius, cum, inter ceteros, | 
legatum eum creasset, nihil de accussa|tione mandassent, immo, 
contra, laudasse||nt; qua ratione effectum est ut omnes | ab accussa- 
tione desisterent: quem | magis, magisque amare et comprobare | 
coepi. Is, certus honoris mei erga | se, ad videndum me, in Urbem 
venit. || Proficiscens, petit ut eum tibi com|memdarem: recte itaque 
feceris, sé | des¢derio illius adnueris. . .—et r(eliqua)...” | 


[ 474 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Found in the sixteenth century at Vieux in Normandy, on the 
site of Araegenuae, the chief village of the Viducasses. The stone 
was transported to Thorigny, where it remained for many years, and 
the document is commonly known as the inscription of Thorigny. 
It is cut on three sides of a block of marble which formed the 
pedestal of a statue. On the front of the monument there is a 
record (styled 1 here), somewhat fragmentary, of the offices and 
benefactions of Sollemnis, of his relations with distinguished men, 
of the action of the three provinces, Lugdunensis, Aquitania, and 
Belgica, in authorizing the statue and of the Viducasses in providing 
a place for it, and the date. The right hand side (11) contains a copy 
of a letter to Sollemnis from Claudius Paulinus, propraetor of 
Britain, written at an unknown place, Tampium, mentioning 
certain gifts which Paulinus makes to Sollemnis. On the left side 
of the pedestal (111) there is a copy of a letter from Aedinius Julianus, 
praetorian prefect, to Badius Comnianus, procurator, and therefore 
the interim governor of Lugdunensis, recommending Sollemnis to 
the good offices of Comnianus particularly because of a service 
which Sollemnis had rendered Paulinus at a meeting of the assembly 
of the Gauls. Aedinius Julianus was praetorian prefect about 
A.D. 235. This fact dates his letter as probably between a.p. 235 
and 238. He had been governor of Lugdunensis about 230. His 
immediate predecessor in this province had been Cl. Paulinus, who, 
at the time of writing the letter on the left side, was propraetor of 
Britain. Therefore, after being governor of Lugdunensis and before 
receiving the post in Britain, he must have been consul, since the 
governorship of Britain was a consular office (Marquardt, St. Verw. 
1, 287). According to CIL. vir, 1045, he was probably in Britain 
about 232 (Desjardins, op. cit. 3, 204, n. 1), and the stormy scene 
in the concilium at Lugdunum occurred three years or more 

‘before this date. He is one of the patronz in the album of Canusium 
(no, 136). Sollemnis was sacerdos Romae et Augusti at Lugdunum, 
the place of meeting of the concz/ium, but the statue was set up in 
his native village. All the cities of the three provinces, fifty-seven 
in number at the beginning of the empire (Carette, Les assemblées 
prov. dela Gaule rom. 119 ff.), had the right to send deputies. From 
the expression cum inter ceteros legatum eum creasset, it may be 


[parse 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


inferred with some probability that certain cities had more than 
one deputy. This conci/ium could evidently inquire into the conduct 
of a governor, and draw up an accusation against him. We have no 
other epigraphical record of the exercise of such power by a con- 
cilium unless indirect reference is made to it in no. 161. However, 
Tacitus and other writers mention nineteen cases in which such 
charges were made by conci/ia (Guiraud, Les assemblées prov. 173 f.). 
Several inscriptions mention resolutions passed in honor of a retiring 
governor (cf. CIL. 111, 14123 X, 1430-1432). For another possible 
instance of the exercise of important political functions by a Gallic 
concilium, cf. no. 50. Probably ex consensu provinciae (111, 18) means 
the same as wmiversi censuerunt (CIL. 1, 4248). This conclusion 
seems to be confirmed by the addition of guasi here (cf. Guiraud, 
op. cit. 109). On the legal meaning of consensus, cf. Leonhard, 
R.E. 4,906. The deputies would seem in some cases to have come 
with instructions from their native cities; cf. mzhil mandassent, 
Ill, 23-24. For the use of et re/igua at the end, cf. Hist. Aug. Firmt, 
; I41. RESCRIPTUM IMPERATORUM DE 
QUERELLIS ARAGUENORUM 


(244-247 p. Chr.) 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 519; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 598; Rém. Mitth. 13 
(1898), 231 ff; Riccobono, p. 373; Bruns, 93; CJL. m1, 8. 14191; 
Girard, p. 207. 
: "Ayadne tuyne| 

Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M. Iul(cus) Philtppus Aug(ustus) et M. 

Iul(tus) Philippus nobilissimus Caes(ar) M. Aurelio Eglecto | pe(r) 

Didymum miugenerum. Procomsule v. c. perspecta fide eorum quae 

scribis, ne | quid iniuriose geratur, ad sollicitudinem suam revocabit. 
5 xa. || Avtoxpatopt Kaicaps M (apxa:) JouXi@s Pirirres EvoeBet 

Kiruyet LeS(acrar) «lal M(apear) lovrtw.] | Pirie ére- 

havertatw. Kaicaps dénois Tapa Adpnriov ’Eydéxt[ou virép 

Tod Koll|vod tHv “Apayounvey rapoikwv Kal yewpyav Tav 

vpwetépav, [pec Belas yevopévns Sam ]|avne Shou Kowvo(d T)o[T]- 

Teavov Lonvav THv Kata Dpvyiav tory dia T(étov) Od[eviou 

Awvpou] | otpatiétov.—llavrev év trois waxapiwratos buav 
Io Kalpots, evoeBéo[TaToe Kal arv]||\7OTaTOL TOV TwTOTE Baciréwr, 


[ 476 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Hpewov Kal yarnvov tov Blov salyovtwv, mo||vnpias Kal d:a- 
cevopov tel ljavpévov, wovor jpyels AAXOTPLA To |v eLUTUXETTA- 
twv] | Kaip@v TacyovTes THVOE THY ikeTeilav U ]luety TpoTdyopev 
exélyyvor Tod Sixaiov Ths de]|noews ev TovToss. 

Xwpiov twétepov eopev lepwotat[ov Kai wamrepet dF || wos orO- 
KANPOS, Ol KaTapevyovTes Kal ryevoOmevol THS Upmerépas [OesdTNTOS 
ixéTat, dia ||loevducOa dé mapa TO ddoyov Kai TapaTpaccbpmeba 
um éxeivov olds Hxiota adixetv Tov mAn||ctov d(e)irer.— 
Mecoyerou yap tuyyavovtes Kal p(n)Te Tapa otpata[pyou pte 
Tap adrov Kaka TraQovtes viv maa||youer adrOTPLA TOV 
UMETEPOV paKapLwTaTaV Katpav: [méfovor yap Has ot dtodev- 
ovtes| | To “Amrriavadv Kriwa TapadipuravovTes TAS NewPopous 
o[Sovs otpatapyat te Kal otpat||t@tar Kat Svvacra. TOV 
mpovyovtTwy Kat ]a thy rod [Karoapiavot te U |||wéTepos érreto- 
e[p |xouevor Katadiprravovtes Tas Aelwddpous od0ovs Kal aro 
Tov] | épyov huds adiotavtes Kal Tovs apoTthpas Boas avy[a- 
pevovtes TA pur Oder ||Nopeva avTols Tapatpdcacovaw, Kal ovV- 
Baive: od ta TuyOvTa Hpas ex T]|ovTOU adiKeta bar StacEevopevous’ 
Tept ov aralvTwv éypadn pos TO cov,|| LeGacré, wéyeOos, o7roTeE 
Thy émapyxov Oueire[v CEovciay..........|||vos, Kal Strws TeEpl 
TovT@y éxewv(n)On cod 1) Ocelot Ns, ) avtuypady Snrol 1) evtadda] | 
éytetayuevn: Quae libello complexi estis ut examinet praestdi 
mandavi, | qui da(b)it operam ne déutiuis querellés locus sit. | 
"Ezresd2) ody ovddév ddhero[s 1) luciv ex tavtyns THls avtuypadys 
éyéveto, cup Bé]|BnKev dé Nuads KaTa THY aypotKiay Ta pH Opel- 
[Adpeva tmaparpdaccec bar, é]||revRBawvoly |rav twev Kat cuptra- 
TovvT@V Has [Tapa TO SixaLor, émrevd7 6 ||é bd TOV Katoapiavav 
ov Ta TuyovTa bilac]|elec[Gar Huds cuvéBn Kal Ta HpéTepa | 
éEavanriloxecOas kai Ta yopia épnuodobar Kal ..av.......4. 
».[.....9 Kab ov tapa t[nv o]ddv Kcatoixotrtlwy ....... | 
isl ceei ie etek POUPILET GA LAT AUT bas Chtae nee en 

From Aragua, a village on one of the imperial estates in Phrygia. 
‘The tenants in this community were too poor to send an embassy 
to the emperor, but the expenses of the delegation were borne by 
the xowvov, apparently a union of the villages on the estate in a 
quasi-municipal organization. Aurelius Eclectus was probably 
magister vici of Aragua, who acts as spokesman for the community. 


[477s 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


Io 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Didymus was the ambassador sent to Rome. The title mzugenerum 
(I. 2) may stand for mil:(tem) (f)rum(entarium), although this in- 
terpretation is rejected by Dittenberger. The complaint of the 
Aragueni is similar to that of other villages in the third century 
(cf. nos. 113, 139, 142-144). They suffered from the exactions of 
soldiers and public officials, here especially the Caesariani (cf. R.E. 
s.v.), who demanded the services of the villagers and their oxen for 
transport duty (Rostowzew, K/io, 6 (1906), 249 ff.). The villagers 
had appealed once before to the emperors, and their complaint had 
been referred to the provincial governor with instructions to remedy 
the matter. Apparently the latter was powerless to curb the licence 
of the imperial officials and soldiery, or he may have connived at 
their exactions. At any rate, it may be observed that the bureau- 
cratic officials and soldiery could not be effectively controlled at 
this period either by imperial mandates or by provincial governors. 
Cf. pp. 15 ffs FHS. 17 (1897), 417 ffs 18 (1898), 340 ff 
Rém. Mitth. 13 (1898), 231 ff.; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 


303 f.3 Kio, 6 (1906), 249 ff; Mus. Belge, 27 (1923), 233 ff. 


142. EPISTULA COLONORUM AD IMPERATORES 
(ca. 200-250 p. Chr.) 


Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 
(1914-15), 37 f, 

IDA \ / \ SS 
...VTas loety KATA Slobov THY W......... 0l....|..VTOS Kab 

of / a / b a / 3 / 
iva d0&n Tis THS ToLAUTNS avTois O[palcdT|nTOs aTroNoyia KaTa- 

, 3 f ‘ \ > an / 
ALuwrraverOa, évéa a[vrA|AaBo]vTes kal ev Secpots Troincartes 
éback[ov || mwapam |éumew éml tovs Kpatiotous érutporolus | 
Tovs vuletépous Suérrovt(o)s Aidéov ’AyAaod [Tod | Kpatic |rou 
Kal Ta THS avOvTatelas pépn: Kall | TO]y wév Eva TOV Evvéa ap- 
f b] v € \ \ / 3 \ Vd n 
yuptov éextrpal[E|dwevor brrép Tas yetdias AtTiKas AUTpor || [T]7s 
cwTnpias apjnKay, Tovs dé NoLTrovs KaT[é]|cxav év Tots Secmois, 
Kal ovK iopev cadas, | Oevotator TOV avTOKpaTopaY, OTrdTEPOV 
Cav|tas TovTOUs TapaTréupovow Tapa T(0)v Kpatia|tov Aydaov 
(ip) Kat avTovs dtab@vrat TapaTrAnaillov tots hOavovew. “Hel? ]s 
95 / =! \ > 7 > / > f \ 
ovv, Orep Hv Suvatov | aOALows av[O]p@rros apnpnpuévots Kal 
Biov kal | cuvyevdv ottws @uds, 0 SuvaTov npeiv jv, é|dnr\o- 


[ 473 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


capev Tadta Kal TO THS Takews ériTpo|Tw vuadv Ad[p(nrALa) | 
Mapxiave Kal trois év “Acia xpat[ic]||rous eretpoTois tuav: 
ixéTar O€ THs UpeTé|pas yesvopeOa, OevdTaTor TOV TwTTOTE AVTO- 
kpa|[r]opwr, Oeias cal avuTepBrAHTOV Bacireias, Kai | [To]is THs 
yewpylas Kauatows mpocéyey Kexwru|[pu lévor TOV KOAANTLOVOY 
Kal TOV avTiKabecTa||Twr aTeLNOUVTWY Kal HwEty TOs KATANEL- 
Topé|vous TOV Tept Wuyhs Kivduvov Kai wn Suvdpevot{s) | éx Tod 
Kwdverbas tHhv yhv épyalecOar pndé tats dello ]rotiKats éra- 
Kovey atropopais Kal Wndows mpos | [Tla é&fs, nat SeducOa 
every (sic) Vas Tpocéabar tiv || Sénow Hudy Kat émiBécOat TO 
éEnyoupévw tov | €Ovous Kal Tots kpatiarots err urpoTrots Umav 
€x|OtKnoat TO TeTON pm MeVOY, Kordoas dé THY els Ta | Xepia Ta 
deotrotixa &hodov Kal THv Eis apes év[o]|xAnow ryewvopenny Smo 
(r)e TOV KOAANTLOVOY? || Kal THY él Tpohacer APYa@v 1%) NELTOUP- 
ylav Tovs v|werépous evoyrovvTaV Kal cKvANVTOD (sic) yeo[p ]|- 
yous TO TravTa Ta HuéeTEpa éx Tpoyovev TpouTe|Y||Ouva civar TO 
iepwTdto Tapeiw TO THS yewpyilas] | dicaiw: TadnOH yap Tpos 
THY VuweTépay OevoTyTa || Hpnrar (sic). ((O)v éav pur) VO THS VpeE- 
Tépas ovpaviou Sel\Evas éxdixia tus emi Tots TorovToLs TeTOAMN- 
pélvors erraxOA Kai BonOia eis Ta pédAXovTAa, avay|Kn ToOvSs 
KATANEAELLMEVOUS HUGS, Ln hépovtas | THY TOV KOANHTL@OVOY Kal 
TOV évayTias (sic), eb’ als || mpoeupnxamev Tpopacecw, TAEovEeiay, 
Kata|Nelrrew Kai éotias Tatpwas Kal Tadouvs tpoyorxo[v]s | 
peTenety Te eis tduwmtixny yhv mpos TO StacwOfhvar— | petdovtas 
yap paddXov tov éxel KaToLKovvTwr of Toly] | tovnpov Savtes 
Biov ) TOV vuetépov yewpydv— || duyadas (Te) yevéo Par Tov 
deomroTiKay ywptior, év ols | (Kal éyevynOnuev Kal érpadnpev 
Kal éx mpoyover | Svapévovtes yewpyol Tas TlaTELs TNPODMEV TO | 
SEoTOTLK® OY. 

‘This inscription comes from the modern village, Aga Bey, in 
the province of Lydia. It contains the complaint of the villagers 
on an imperial estate protesting against the exactions of imperial 
officials and municipal magistrates. The first part of the petition is 
lost, but it is apparent that the immediate cause of complaint was 
the arrest of nine of the tenants by officers who claimed to be acting 
under the authority of the procurator. One of the nine had been 
released under a heavy ransom, but the fate of the remainder could 


[ 479 |] 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


not be ascertained, and an appeal to Aurelius Marcianus had been 
ineffectual. The petitioners now set forth the fact that they had 
been tenants on the imperial estate on hereditary leasehold (ll. 38, 
47, 51 ff.): that they were oppressed by collationes (cf. Garroni, 
Accademia dei Lincet, 25 (1916), 66 ff.) and by municipal magistrates 
who sought to compel them to perform liturgies and to hold office 
in the neighboring cities. Apparently residents of the cities had 
sought to escape their municipal obligations by taking up leases on 
the imperial estates (cf. Ramsay, Studies in the History and Art o 
the Eastern Provinces, 356 ff.; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 
229, 398 ff.). Such tenants were exempt from municipal charges 
(Dig. 50. 6. 6, 11), but this method of evasion had become so 
common in the fourth century that Constantine issued an edict 
forbidding curzales the right to hold leases on imperial estates except 
under very strict regulation (Cod. Th, 12. 1. 33). The petitioners 
also threaten to abandon the imperial leaseholds and to take refuge 
on private estates, where, they claim, the villainous officials do less 
harm. This document is most important as it reveals the flight from 
the cities; the oppression of officials even on tenants of the imperial 
estates; and, finally, the power of patronage exerted by great land- 
owners at this time, who were able to protect their tenants where 
the emperor could not. Cf. pp. 214f,, nos. 113, 139, 141, 143, 
1443 Zeitschr. der Savigny-Stift., Roman. Abtheil. 36 (1915), 157 ff. 
‘The editors of this document are inclined to limit its date between 
A.D. 198-222. 


143. EPISTULA VICANORUM AD IMPERATORES 
(ca. 200-250 p. Chr.) 


Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 
(1914), 25. 

....[T9 |v tpoaipecw avtav AoyiSouévwv v[omobe|ciar (?)] 
LTE VOmimou KaTHYOpoU TLVds e&toT[Lapé|vou, w|nTE UTroKELpEeVNS 
aitias, undé pavepod tilvos éy|KAnpaT]os tdiov Tevds dvTos, 
ETLTPEXOVTLY Ob TOLOUTOL mov[oL H peTAa TAY (?) || Ternp Jevcouéevwry 
takewy is dvaceia pov THs KOuNs wovny ev d |o8@ Ta[de Tad| Trnv 
Bo]nO@vav érrevoncev  mpodnroumévn Kopn ouv[de|nOei]oa Sd.’ 
EMovd THs weyadns Vuov Kal ovpaviou Kall fepw|tatn |s Bacirelas, 


[ 480 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


is ToUTO me Tpoxeiptcapevn Kal TH[v ixe|Telaly mpoceverxeiv. 
Kai rodto Seduce amiddvtas vulas, pél|yeor joo cal Oevoratos TOV 
TWTOTE AUTOKPATOPwY, Tpos TE TOL[S | UweTE |pous vouous TAY TE 
Tpoyovav Vuov Kal Tpos THY eLpnyiKn| Vv | Duo |v rept ravTas diKaLo- 
aun, peconoavtas 8é, ods det pelslonolate avTot Te Kal Tay 
TO THS Bacidelas tpoyourxoy vulav | yévols, TOUS THY ToLavTHY 
Tpoaiperiw éyovtas KoANynTiwval[s, Kel|k@A |upévous péev ael Kal 
KorabecOat Kedevomevous, ov[K arro|deEal|wévous 5é, adda ael 
Bapvrepov avtimaxopévor[s | tal|s buetépats vopobeciais, cite 
ppovpevtapiors mpoule|unvur jro, e’te opotais Takeow, KeAedoaL 
Kal Xpnpatioas vouw tilvi, | @s THY avlaidcay adTav avTots (1) 
Hryemovela Tpoaayel* e& Oé TLS, GEw TA[Y || ToL loVT@Y Aéywr eivas, 
Tpopacet KaTnyoplas Tivos emt (é)ox[eu|wévn |v THY KaKoupyiav 
emiTpéxol, wn Sud THS Hyewovias, a[ArAa | dia tév] tdEewv 
Bacavifwy, as of voor Oérovaew byov tle Kal | Tov mpoyover 
El [1) VOMLWOS KATIYOpOS, 17 Tpocée|[pxw@v|Tat Tpds TOUTO ai | THs 
Takews é€ovciat Kal........ 

This inscription comes from Mendechora (Ilévte ywpia) in 
Lydia. The editors (/oc. cet.) believe that this village lay within the 
territorium of, and belonged to, the ancient city of Philadelphia. 
It is also possible that the village may have become part of an im- 
perial estate before the petition was forwarded to the emperor, since 
there is no reference to the city officials, and the appeal appears 
to have been presented by someone designated by the village ¢f. 
Rostovtseff, AZus. Belge, 27 (1923), 233 ff.). As in similar docu- 
ments of this period the villagers protest against the exactions of 
officials; the col/ationes (cf. no. 142), the frumentaru, and similar 
agents (ouolais td&eowv). The villagers complain especially of 
illegal arrests by officials, apparently, without lodging any formal 
accusation (cf. no. 142). Such arrests were contrary to the law 
(Dig. 48. 18. 22), but the village-authorities were powerless. On 
the interpretation of the legal principles involved cf. Keil and 
Premerstein, /oc. cit.; Weiss, Zeitschr. der Savigny-Stift., Roman. 
Abteil. 36 (1915), 157 ff-; Garroni, Accademia det Lincei, 25 (1916), 
66 ff; Rostovtseff, ‘Four. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff.; cf. nos. 113, 
139, 141-144. 


AMA [ 481 ] 31 


10 


15 


20 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


144. QUERELLAE VICANORUM 
(ca. 200-250 p. Chr.) 
Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 
(1914-15), 11. 


(Versus 1-9, 26 seqq., maxime mutili, omisst sunt.) 


eiwOora[v] tats [........------? otatiwval|piwy [x«(at) | 
dppovpe|vrapio ly wy..... ea fice rasta a Set RES ee HO ct tars 
Meier cin ede ae vya....|| [rats x]@mats émricetovtes 

CVE Ne Aas | dyaOod pev ovdevds yetvouevor aitt|or, avuTroiatots Oé 


dhoptiots K(al) Enuimpalow évoelovtes THY KO-UNV, OS TUpBat| vey 
éFavadovpévny avtnv els TA ApuelltTpa daTravnpata Tov ere dy |- 
povvtev | K(al) e[is tT]o wAHOos TOV KoAANTL@VOY a|TrolaTeLpeEl- 
aO(?)]a[c] ev Noutpod bu’ atropiay, | atroarerpeto[O]e [de (at) | 
Tov pos Tov Bilov a[ylavKé[w |v alr aly ]o[p eve. .¢.. pos || 
TUS Atay ER utesatins oupev... | KATOLKOY. 

This fragmentary inscription was found in the modern village 
of Ekiskuju in Asia Minor. As in nos, 113, 142-143, the villagers 
are harassed by the exactions of officials, the stationari, frumentarit, 
and others. Unbearable fines and burdens are imposed upon them, 
and the villagers have been ruined by the cost of entertaining officials 
and by collationes. ‘he document seems to record the reply of the 
governor to the petition of the residents. The editors suggest that 
Aurelius Marinus, whose name appears in the first line of the in- 
scription, is the provincial governor. For similar complaints, cf. 


nos. 113, 139, 141-143. 


145. EPISTULA IMPERATORUM TRAIANI DECI ET 
HERENNI ETRUSCI AD APHRODISIENSES 
(251 p. Chr.) 


Le Bas-Waddington, 3, 1624; CIG. 2743. 

Avtoxpatap Kaicap [dios Méoovos Kvivtos Tpaiavos | 
Aéxwos], EiceBys, Eituyns, SeBacros, Snuapyixhs | éEovoias 
TO y', UTatos TO B’, atrodedevypévos TO TpiTov, | waTHnp TaTpioos, 
avOvratos, kal [‘Epévvios Tpaiavos || Aéxvos Kaioap], apyvepevs 
péytotos, Snuapyixns eEovaoias | TO wp@tov, bratos atrodedeuy- 
pévos, Adpoderotéwy tols | dpyovow Kai The BovdAne Kal Tae 


[ 482 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


SHwot yatpev. | Kixds jv twas Kal dua THY ém@vupoY THs TOAEWS 
Geov cai | dua tHv mpcds “Pwpaious oixevoTnTad Te Kal TioTiW 
noOhvas || wey ert tHe KaTacTace Ths Bactrelas THs nuetépas, | 
Ouaias 5é Kal evyas arodobvat Sixaias. Kal pets 5é | tHv Te 
éXevOepiav tpety dvrAaTTOMEV THY UTdpyoveay | Kal TA Gdra OE 
ocurtayta Sikata, oTdcwY Tapa TV TPO H|“aY avTOKpaTOpaV 
TeTUYHKaTE, TUVavEEW. ETOimws || ExovTES Uu@V Kal TAS TpOS TO 
MédXov ErrriOas. | "EmpécBevov Adpyrtos Oeddwpos kat ‘Ovjct- 
pos. | Kdtvyeire. 

From Aphrodisias in Caria. ‘he names of the emperors, erased 
in antiquity, were restored by Boeckh as those of Diocletian and 
Maximian. The difficulties of this restoration were pointed out 
by Waddington, and we have followed the text which he adopted. 
The title of pontifex maximus, ascribed to the son instead of the 
father, is undoubtedly an error on the part of the stonecutter. 
Aphrodisias is recorded as a free city by Pliny (N.H. 5. 29), and 
retained this privilege as late as the reign of Gordian (Waddington, 
note ad /oc.). Reinach corrects the readings of Waddington (Rev. d. 


ét. grec. 19 (1906), 82). Cf. nos. 137, 138, 153. 


146. DECRETUM DECURIONUM ET POSSESSORUM 
(256 vel fortasse 186 p. Chr.) 


An, ép. 1903, no. 202; cf. zbid. 1894, no. 61. 
PAE ah sti te of his, Viet Makel Gol wURt Ona Ars er bats EAS ES ELE 


Glabrione 11 cos... .pr(idie)... lanuarias(?). . .civitate.. .imcuria 
cum conventus haberetur decurionum et possessorum civium ibi Victor 
Gallitios(i) f. et Honoratus | .. .f(elius) sufetes verba fecerunt: cum 
audivissemus L. Titium et C.. Serum questos quod agri suorum 
pecoribus ovium devas|tarentur et in re praesenti constitisset et agros 
vastatos et arbores magnam partem Conrosas esse quod ipsum initium 
honoris nostri | zzstabat dominis pecorum ut servos iniuria prohibeant 
denuntiavimus....1...Sit facta etiam mentione sacrarum litte- 
rarum || ...2lt responderunt servos sua sponte iniuriam fecisse... 
on...#ostramque denuntiationem initium honoris | nostri ante- 
cessisse...cum...t ne..eat els contu...rum prodesse et aliter ea 
res | ...ef contra talem iniuriam iam pri...ss...undum sacras 


[ 483 ] 31-2 


Io 


15 


Io 


T5 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


co...ones actum fuerit quae | ...rem vestro decreto subiciendam 
existimavimus. | Exemplum epistulae datae ab imp....ad..cum 
mihi desiderium vestrum videtur et exemplo adiuval||rz anteriorum 


legum...et per se tustum esse. Itaque veto quemquam in agrum 


vestrum invitis vobis pecora pascendi gratia indu|cere. . .re quod 
si ignorante domino servus induxer?t pecora | .. .2m zpsum servum 
procos. severe constituet si iusso domini |... pSyeeaa non solum 
servum ipsum sed etiam praetium servi ex forma censoria % d. 
dominus|....praestare debebit. Servi st sctente quidem domino sed 
sua sponte id admiserint a procos. flectentur ita ut in || posterum nemo 
audeat...elegentur.. .quit fieri placeret de ea re universi cen|suere 

. passim in territorio uniusculuscuwmque pecora pascendi | .. .iniu 
et cum etiam post ea constitutione...nu... 


Fragment found at Henchir-Snobbeur. The inscription has been 
restored and interpreted by Schulten, Festschrift xu Hurschfeld, 
171 ff. It belongs perhaps to the year a.p. 256, when M.’ Acilius 
Glabrio was consul. The use of cognomina in place of nomina in the 
names of the two magistrates, and the peregrine patronymic of 
Victor, show that the place was a peregrine czvitas. Its magistrates 
would therefore be sufetes. It would appear that the flocks of certain 
residents of this village have been driven on the land of other citizens, 
and that the aggrieved citizens have laid the case before the local 
magistrates, who have forbidden further trespass. But the trespassers 
have persisted. In these circumstances the magistrates call a meeting 
of the decurions and possessores (1. 2). No parallel to such a meeting 
is known. The stone records the result. The re/atzo of the magis- 
trates begins with zz, and is given in the first person plural. It 
includes an imperial rescript beginning with mihi destdertum and 
ending with zta ut. . .audeat. ‘The decree of the decurions, of which 
only a few words are left, begins with gust ferz. The ordinary price 
ofa slave in Italy was 2500 denarii; cf. Kiibler, Festschrift f. Vahlen, 
561. he proconsul referred to is the proconsul of Africa Procon- 
sularis, in whose territory the village lay. Our interest in the 
document lies in the fact that we find local magistrates, in settling 
a local legal question, applying a principle laid down in an imperial 
constitution drawn up for the guidance of a proconsul in a similar 
situation. 


’ [ 484 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


147. EDICTUM IMPERATORUM VALERIANI ET GALLIENI 
(253-259 p. Chr.) 
Le Bas-Waddington, 3, 27204; Ditt. Or. Gr. 262; CIG. 4474. 


Imp. Caesar | Publius Licin|nius Valerianus | Pius Felix Aug. I 


et Imp. 
Licin|nius Cornelius Saloninus | Valerianus nobilissimus Caesar | 
Aurelio Mareae et aliis: || Regum antiqua beneficia consuetu|dine 
etiam insecuti temporis adpro|bata is qui provinciam regit remota | 
violentia partés adversae incolumia | vobis manere curabit. 





’Emictonn Avtidxou Bactréas. | 
Baotnreds ’Avtioyos Eidjuas yaipev. "Ed00n 0 Kataxeyo- 
pta|wévos Urrouvnuatiouds* yevécOw ovv Kabore SednrAwTat Tepl 
Ov Set dua god | cvvterec Ova. UpocevexPévtos prot rept THs 
évepryetas Oeod Avds Bartoxaixns || éxpiOn cvvywpnOjnvar avTar 
eis dtravta Tov ypovor, GOev Kat 7 SUvapis TOD | Oeod KaTapxerTat, 
Kodunv thy BactoxalKnlynv, iv mpotepov éoxev Anuntptos | 
Anpuntpiov tov Mvacaiov évtoupimva ths mept Amdutav catpa- 
mTéeias, avy Tois | cuvKupodor Kal KaOjKovar TaoL KaTa TOvS 
TpovTapyovtas TepLoptapovs | Kal ody Tols TOD ever TATOOS ETOUS 
/ 
YEVHMATLY, OTWS 7 ATO TAVTNS TPOGobOS || avadiaKnTaL cis TAS 
\ in , , \ ” \ \ v 

KaTa phvas cvvTeNoupévas Ovaias Kal TadXNa TA Tpds avEno| ww 
TOD Lepod cuVTEVOVTA UT TOU KaOLaTAamEVOU UTO TOU Oeod iepéws, 
\ ; na > a a 
ws el|Ocorar adywvtar b€ Kal KaTAa phva Tavnyvpels aTerels THe 
TevTeKaloekaTne Kal | TptaKdds* Kal eivar TO peév Lepov AovAo?, 
THv b€ KOpny avetric[taé |uov pndeutas | aroppnoews Tpocere- 
xOcions, Tov dé évavTimOnoopevoy Tis T@Y TpPOYe||ypaupévav 

” Ye 4 b] / > a / \ \ > 4 b 
évoxov elvat aceBeiar. “Avaypaphvat te Kal ta avtiypada év | 
oTnAne ALOivyne Kal TEeOjvar ev TAL avT@L tepw@r. Aenoes odv 

Qn ® 7 (/ , ’ f al / 
ypaphvas ots el| Oro as, iva yéevntat akoXov0as Tots Snrovpévocs. | 
WVndicpa THs ToAcws TEUPOEV Peds AdyovaTar. | 

> , \ em 4 Me \ 4 \ lal b lal 
Exravavres 6€ avépyec@ar Tavta Ta wvera bia TOV évTadOa 
Kat éml yopas | ayopntév mpabnaopueva Kal? é[x ]aortnv lepo- 
pnviav mpos TO adiare(t)7[Ta] brapywv | waco Tots aviodcer 
Tpookuvyntais, emipedouevov TOD THS ToAEwS ayollonTodD pndé 
eTLXELPOUVTOS 7) OYAODYTOS Tpopdce. Tapoxns Kal Tédous | Kal 
emnpelias TWOS 7) ATraLTHTAaLwWS* avdpaTroda bé Kal TeTpaTroba | Kal 


[ 485 ] ° 


| Caesar Publius Licinius | Gallienus Pius Fel(ix) Aug. et 5 


Io 


af 


Io 


15 


III 


I 


° 


On 


To 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Aowra CHa opoiws TwreicOw ev THLTOT ML Ywpls TéEXOUS 7) ETrN| pElas 
TLWos } aTaLTnoaLas. Oi KaToYXoL ayo o’paviou ALos THs LTO TOV 
Le|Baorov els Te TOV Oeov evoeBetas Kal Tov TOTrOV EdEVOe||pE[/ las 
Thy Ociav avtiypadny bd TavT@Y TpocKLVOULEVnY TpoeTatav. 
This inscription, from Baetocaece in Syria, is of interest because 
of the regard for tradition shown by the Roman emperors even in 
the third century. King Antiochus had assigned the village to the 
temple of Zeus with the privilege of holding regular markets where 
the traders were not subject to the regular taxes imposed on the 
sale of goods, and the villagers were exempted from the obligation 
to provide hospitality (hospztium) for soldiers or officials. In later 
times the village was part of a municipal territorium (possibly be- 
longing to Apamea), but it still enjoyed its old privileges of immunity. 
‘These were in danger of being lost, and the city appealed on behalf 
of the village to the emperors who confirmed the grant made by 


Antiochus hundreds of years before. Cf. Ditt. Or. Gr. 483. 


148, EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE DE 
NUNDINIIS CONSTITUENDIS 
(260-270 p. Chr.) 

Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1381, ll. 1-17. 

Ah Sera os MakimirAdrsaves [avO]b7rartos | [ris “Acias] Aou- 
vilv los ‘Povdar tai Accalpyo lu [eve]p[y létov | cal “Aovapyne 
yalipew. | THe o]ne mpos tovs Oeovs, o[d]s idpva@ai dns [ev || 
the T lerparru[p |ytat, [Opn |oxeias [kai T]he Told y lévous évdd&| ov 
Naputporn[t |e cat the o[He pwlera THs evyev|ei[a]s Tév tpol 7 lov 
koopmi[o|tnte mlav]rt ryod|wac Ofrov ws teu lace Sixatos 


im[dap |yers ....|..T@ yodr Tols THS ayopaiou atro[ po |baww [Bon- 
LTS Are ars ie T]etpatrupyila d]ea thy e[is] oe Tov.auea....| 

..Ta TELny ayéto T[nv] ayopalioly | [éxao|rne mrev[t Jexac- 
dexaltne] 0 TOv...|.... [Terpa }rupyevr[ & |v OnuWoS ... aloTa, 
Hn Jenids [rédv | rorNcwr] Tar xar[a] Tv Mao[vilav él av jov- 
TOMY wheter |.... [ev rladvrne le nucpat ayo[paliov ayovonr[s, 


Kal yew|noetat TlovTo Kal éxactov [uqlva av[lere|xorvtas. | 
“Elpploco. | 

(We have omitted parts 4 and c of the document as published by 
Cagnat.) 


[ 486 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


From Koula in Lydia. From this inscription we learn that a 
city or village must make application to the governor of the province 
for the privilege of establishing a market-fair in its district. Cf. 
Besnier, Dict. Dar. 1v, p. 1223 nos. 96, 147. 


149. DECRETUM XV VIRUM DE SACRIS FACIUNDIS 
(289 p. Chr.) 


CIL. x, 3698; Dessau, 4175; Bruns, 75; Riccobono, p. 262. 


M. Magrio Basso, L. Ragonio | Quintiano cos., k. Iunis, | Cumis 
in templo divi Vespa|siani, in ordine decurionum, || quem M. Mal- 
lonius Undanus | et Q. Claudius Acilianus praet. | coegerant, 
scribundo sorte | ducti adfuerunt Caelius Pan|nychus, Curtius 
Votivos, Considi|jus Felicianus, referentibus pr. | de sacerdote 
faciendo Matris | deae Baianae in locum Restituti | sacerdotis 
defuncti, placuit uni|versis Licintum Secundum || sacerdotem fieri. | 
—xvV viri sac(ris) fac(iundis) pr(aetoribus) | et magistratibus Cuman. 
sal. | Cum ex epistula vestra cognove|rimus creasse vos sacerdotem || 
Matris deum Licinium Secundum | in locum Claudi Restituti 
defunc|zi, secundum voluntatem vestra (szc) | permisimus ei occavo 
et | corona, dumtaxat intra || fines coloniae vestrae, uti. | Optamus 
vos bene valere. | Pontius Gavius Maximus | promagistro suscripsi 


xvi kal. | Septembres, M. Umbrio Primo, || T. FI. Coeliano cos. 


Stone found near Baiae in 1785. It contains a decree of the 
decurions of Cumae announcing the election of a new sacerdos 
Matris deae to fill a vacancy and a letter of the guindecimutri sacris 
faciundis of Rome confirming the election. The interest of the 
inscription for us lies in the fact that, with the rapid extension of 
the cult of Magna Mater in the period following the Antonines, 
and with the admission of Roman citizens to its priesthood (cf. 
Wissowa, Religion u. Kultus d. Rimer, 265 ff.), the chapters in the 
cities were brought under the control of the xv viri of the city of 
Rome. Cf. also CIL. x, 3699, ex s. c. dendrophori creati qui sunt 


sub cura xv virorum, s. f. 


[eae ze 


20 


25 


30 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


150, TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(saec. 111 p. Chr.) 


Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 
(1914), 87. 

"Ayabje Toyne, | Eat rputaveas A. Derr (tuiov) Adp(nriov) | 
"Ayirretdn ve(wrépov) yun(vos) & Advp(yd10s) “Epyuoraos | “Pov- 
atixov éSwxev vrép apyns || AoyoTelas Kabas edoke Tois | 
Kkopntats (Snvapia) dvaxdota TwevTy|KovTa mpooxXwpHnaavTa ets 
THV TOV TELPOVWY TUVTENELAY. 

This inscription from Lydia is important for the study of village 
administration and for the history of recruiting in the third century. 
The sum of two hundred and fifty denarii was exacted as an initia- 
tion fee for the office of Noytarns and, by a decree of the villagers, 
the whole amount was devoted to the payment of the aurum 
tironicum in the village. For the history of this tax, cf. Mitteis, 
P. Leipzig, 54 (cf. ibid. no. 35); P. Oxy. 1103, and Rostovtseff 
Four. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff. 


151. EPISTULA IMPERATORUM INCERTORUM DE 
CONSTITUTIONE CIVITATIS TYMANDENORUM 
(saec. 111 p. Chr.) 


CIL. 111, 8. 6866; Dessau, 6090; Bruns, 34; Riccobono, p. 338. 


OMI DENICIS 64 i, sean Tymandenis item | ....ad 
scientiam nostram|..... tua pertulit, contemplati sumus || T'yman- 
denos voto praecipuo, summo etiam | studio optare, ut ius et digni- 
tatem Civita|tis praecepto nostro consequantur, Lepide | carissime. 
Cum itaque ingenitum nobis | sit, ut per universum orbem nostrum 
civi|tatum honor ac numerus augeatur eos|que eximie cupere 
videamus, ut civitatis | nomen honestatemque percipiant, isdem | 
maxime pollicentibus quod apud se decu|rionum sufficiens futura 
sit copia, cre||didimus adnuendum. Quare volumus, | ut eosdem 
Tymandenos hortari culres, ut voti sui conpotes redditi<s> | cum 
ceteris civitatibus nostris ea que | ipsos consecutos ius Civitatis con- 
pel|tit recognoscere, obsequio suo nitan|tur inplere. Ut autem sic 
uti ceteris | civitatibus ius est coeund7 zn curiam, | faciendi etiam 
decreti et gerendz ce|tera que iure permissa sunt, ipsa quo||que per- 


[ 488 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


missu nostro agere possit, et | magistratus ei itemque aediles, quaes-| 
tores quoque et si qua alia necessaria | facienda sunt, creare debebunt. 
Quem | ordinem agendarum rerum perpetuo || pro civitatis merito 30 
custodiri conve|niet. Numerum autem decurionum | interim quin- 
quaginta hominum in|stituere debebis, Deorum autem in|mortalium 
favor tribuet, ut auctis || eorum viribus adque numero maior ejorum 35 
haberi copia possit. 


This inscription was found by Sterrett (cf. Papers of the Am. 
School of Class. Studies at Athens, 3 (1884-1885), p. 384, no. 558) 
on the site of ‘Tymandus in Pisidia. The names of the emperors at 
the beginning are lacking, but the script seems to belong to the 
close of the third or the early part of the fourth century. The words 
deorum immortalium (ll. 33 f.) seem to fix the date before Con- 
stantine. Asin no. 154 the reply to the petition is addressed to an 
official. Whether Lepidus (1. 7) was governor of Pisidia, vecarzus 
of Asia, or praef. praet. Or. (Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 5, 550), we 
cannot say. Like the people of Orcistus the T'ymandeni ask for 
the zus et dignitas civitatis (ll. 6 f.; cf. 11 f.). The granting of their 
request carries with it the privilege of establishing a curza, passing 
decreta, and the election of duovirs, aediles, and quaestors (Il. 22 ff). 
A normal municipal senate comprised one hundred members, but 
we find instances of smaller and larger numbers (cf. no. 136). The 
emperors plan to increase the number of members as “T'ymandus 
grows (Il. 34 ff). The statement isdem maxime pollicentibus, quod 
apud se decurtonum sufficiens futura sit copia (ll. 12 ff.) isa significant 
reference to the comparatively large fortune required for a decurion- 
ship, and perhaps to the entrance fee exacted in many cities (cf. 
pp. 142 f.). It would be interesting to know whether the imperial 
writers have in mind also the responsibility of the curza/es for the 
taxes due to the central government. The fact that Tymandus 
wished to have a curia would seem to show that membership in it 


was still prized; cf. pp. 113 ff. 


[ 489 ] 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


152. RESCRIPTUM DE OFFICIALIUM 
EXACTIONIBUS INLICITIS 
(saec. 111 p. Chr.) 


CIL. vi, S. 17639. 


....et onerari se inlicitis. . .|mzlitum atq(ue) oficialium exa|ctz- 

onibus ratione halita decreti concili, quod susci|tavit has querelas cum 

5 magno animi mei || dolore audivi; temporum illorum quorum |... 

fuit ad nunc quis aequo animo | ferat exactionibus inlicitis quibus | 

zmponunt fortunis alienis immi|”ere ruinam exauriant compendis 

© su||¢s....uam populi vel fisci debiti | reciproce requies non et 

mi|/tes parentium ac liberorum | swmma excipit oficiales munifi-| 

15 centia...ne quasi quodam more consti||¢wto publici vectigalis pa- 

terentur | ze posthac admittant | aut poenae tis pro delicti qualitate 

in|rogentur...s de qua re et pro(curatoribus) meis | /¢teras mist 

20 et rescriptum meum etiam provincialibus innotescere vol||/w... .clant 
L. Apronius Pius leg. Aug..... 


Benevolentia eius circa provinciam suam hic. 


An inscription painted in red letters on a stone tablet found at 
Ain Zui in the ancient province of Numidia. The left edge of the 
stone is broken off. Probably the last line begins the second part 
of the inscription which was continued on another stone. The 
uncertainty of some of the restorations made by Mommsen leaves 
us in doubt of the exact meaning at various points, but the main 
purpose of the emperor is plain. The document is an imperial 
rescript or edict from about the middle of the third century. The 
emperor intervenes to put a stop to the unlawful exactions made 
from the provincials by imperial officials and soldiers. Since his 
efforts to this end have been ineffective in the past, he does not 
content himself with giving instructions to his procurators, but he 
causes this rescript to be published (1. 19) in Numidia, probably 
by the legate L. Apronius Pius (1. 20), of whom we hear in other 
inscriptions (cf. E.E. 5, 669; 7, 7933 7, 395 = Dessau, 1196; 
CIL, vin, 8782). 


[ 490 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


153. TITULUS OPERIS PUBLICI 
(ca. 312 p. Chr.) 


CIL. vu, 210 = vit, S. 11299. 


(4) 
Coloniae Cillitanae | 
QO. Manlius Felix C. filius Papiria receptus post alia arcum quo- 
que cum insignibus colomzae | solita in patriam libertate erexit ob 
culus dedicationem decurionibus sportulas curiis epu/as ded. 


(2) 
Clementia temporis et virtute | divina DD. NN. Constantini et 
Licint inuc (sic) | semp. Aug. ornamenta /berta. restituta et vetera 
civi|tatis insignia curante Ceionio Aproniano c. v. || patro. civitatis. 5 


‘Two inscriptions found on an arch at colonia Flavia Cillium 
or colonia Cillitana. Inscription (4) is in smaller letters and of a 
later date than (a). The arch was probably thrown down when 
Maxentius invaded Africa in 311 and was restored after the 
victory of Constantine and Licinius in 312. In 1. 2 of (4) D.N. 
and et Lzcimi, according to Mommsen, were originally on the 
stone, erased in consequence of the quarrel between Constantine 
and Licinius, and restored later. Ornamenta lberta(tis) restituta 
would naturally imply that the town was restored to the status of 
a civitas libera. Cf., however, Henze, De civitatibus lberis, 80 f. 


154. EPISTULA ABLABI PRAEFECTI PRAETORIO ET CON- 
STANTINI IMPERATORIS DE IURE CIVITATIS ORCIS- 
TANORUM 

(323-326; 331 p. Chr.) 
CIL. 111, S. 7000; Dessau, 6091; Bruns, 35; Riccobono, p. 341. 


Ut alia sic haec quae in precem contu/istzs et nominis | et digni- Col. 1 
tatis reparationem iure quaerunt obtime|re. Proinde vicari inter- 
cessione quae fuerant mut\ilata ad integrum prisci honoris reduxit 
imp(erator) super omnes re||tro plus, ut et vos oppidumgue diligentia 5 
vestra tui|tum expetito legum adque appellationis sp/endore zure 
decreti | perfruamini infrascribti. | 


[49n 4 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


Io 


T5 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


Have Ablabi carissime nobis. | Incole Orcisti, iam nuxc oppidi 
et || Civitatis, iucundam munificien|tiae nostrae materiem prae- 
buelrunt, Ablabi carissime et iucundissi|me. Quibus enim studium 
est urbes vel no| vas condere vel longaevas erudire vel in||termortuas 
reparare, id quod petebatur acce|ptissimum fuit. Adseruerunt enim 
vicum suum | spatiis prioris aetatis oppidi splendore florulisse, ut 
et annuis magistratwum fascibus orna|retur essetque curialibus ce- 
lebre et populo || civium plenum. Ita enim ei situ adque ingenio | 
locus opportunus esse perhibetur, ut ex qu|attuor partibus co 
totidem in sese congruant | viae, quibus omnibus publicis mansio 
ea medi|alis adque accommoda esse dicatur. Aquarum || ibi abun- 
dantem afluentiam, labacra quoque | publica privatague eorum, 
istatuis veterum | principum ornata, et populum commanentium | 
adeorcelebrem aa uit, ali ibidem sunt, | facile compleantur provisa 
ex decursibus || praeterfluentium aguarum,........ {rum numerum 
copiosum. Quibus cum omni|bus memoratus locus abundare di- 
catur, con|tigisse adseruerunt, ut eos Nacolenses sidz | adnecti ante 
id temporis postularent. Quod || est indignum temporibus nostris, 
ut tam op|portunus locus civitatis nomen amittat, | et inutile com- 
manentibus, ut depraeda|tione potiorum omnia sua commoda 
utilita|tesque deperdant. Quibus omnibus quasi || quidam cumulus 
accedit, quod omnes | zbidem sectatores sanctissimae religilonis 
habitare dicantur. Qui cum praecalrentur, ut sibi ius antiquum 
nomenque | civitatis concederet nostra clementia, || sicuti adnofa- 
tionis nostrae subiecta | cum precibus exempla ¢estantur, huiusmo|di 
sententiam dedimus. Nam haec quae in pre|cem contulerunt, et 
nominis et dignitatis | reparationem iure quae|runt obtinere. 
Proinde gra|vitatis tuae intercesszone | quae fuerant mutiata || ad 
integrum prisci honoris | reduci sancimus, ut et ipsi | oppidumque 
diligentza sua | tuitum expetito legum ad|gue appellationis splen||dore 
perfruantur. Par es¢ | zgitur sinceritatem tuam | guod promptissime 
pro tempo|rzs nostri dignitate concess7|mus, erga supplicantes fes||7- 
nanter implere. Vale, Abladz, | carissime et iucundissime nobis. | 

Exemplum Precum. | 

Ad auxilium pietatis vestrae | confugimus, domini impp. Con- 
stantine || AZaxime victor semper Aug. et Crispe, | Constantine et 
Constanti nobb. Caes. | 


[ 492 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


Patria nostra Orcistos vetustzs|szmum oppidum fuit et ex anti- 
quissz| mis temporibus, ab origine etiam|| cevitatis dignitatem obtinuit. | 
Id in medio confinio Galatiae perbe|nae situm est. Nam quattuor 
viarum | transitus exhibet: id est civitatzs | Pessinuntesium, quae 
Civitas dis||tat a patria nostra tricensimo fe|re /apide; nec non etiam 
civitates Afi|daitanorum, quae et ipsa est a patria | nostra in tri- 
censimo miliario; e¢ czvz|tatis Amorianorum, quae posita... (re- 
liqua desiderantur). 

Act. prid. | kal. Iulias | Constantinopoli. | 

Imp. Caes. Constantinus || maximus Guth. victor ac trium|fator 
Aug. et Fl. Cla. Constantinus | Alaman. et F/. Jul. Constantius 
nnbb. | Caess. salutem dicunt | ordini civit. Orcistanorum. || Actum 
est indulgentiae nos|trae munere, ius vobis civita|tis tributum non 
honore modo | verum libertatis etiam privi|legium custodire. Itaque 
Naj|colensium iniuriam ultra in|dulgentiae nostrae beneficia | per- 
durantem praesenti re|scribtione removemus, idque | oratis vestris 
petitionique || deferimus, ut pecuniam, quam | pro cultis ante 
solebatis in|ferre, minime deinceps dependa|tis. Hoc igitur ad virum 
praesta|ntissimum rationalem Asia||nae dioeceseos lenitas nostra. | 
perscribsit, qui secutus for|mam indulgentiae concessae | vobis 
pecuniam deinceps pro | supra dicta specie expeti a vol|bis postu- 
larique prohibebit. | Bene valere vos cupimus. | Basso et Abladzo 
cons. 


A large stone, with an inscription on three sides of it, which was 
copied in part by Pococke in 1752, by Hamilton in 1839, and in 
its entirety by Ramsay in 1886 (cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 5, 542— 
544). It was found on the site of Orcistus in Phrygia Salutaris. 
The stone bears inscriptions of two different dates. In the first 
place we have three inscriptions of the same year containing (a) the 
last part of the letter of Ablabius to the Orcistani (col. 1, Il. 1-7); 
() the rescript of Constantine to Ablabius (col. 1, 8-11, 16); 
(c) the beginning of the petition of the Orcistani to Constantine 
and his sons. In the second place we have a rescript (d) of Con- 
stantine at a later date to the Orcistani (col. 111, 1-32). The date 
of (a), (4), and (c) falls between a.p. 323, when Constantius became 
Caesar, and 326, when Crispus died (Mommsen, op. cit. 5, 548). 
The last inscription (d) is dated June 30, a.p. 331. The first 


[eos are 


25 


30 


Col, 111 
5 


Io 


15 


20 


a5 


30 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


petition of the people of Orcistus (c) was given to the vzcarius 
dioceseos Asianae (cf. 1, 3), transmitted by him to Ablabius, praef. 
praet. per Orientem, and then sent to the emperor. ‘he emperor 
sends his answer (2) to the prefect, who in turn communicates it 
to the Orcistani with a letter of his own (a). In the second instance 
we have only the rescript of the emperor (d) addressed to the ordo 
civitatis Orcistanorum (111, 9). The Dioecesis Asiana (cf. 111, 25) in 
which Orcistus lay was in direct charge of a vzcarzus (cf. 1, 3), who 
in turn was subordinate to the praefectus praetorio Orientis (cf. 
Abbott, 338; Kornemann, R.E. 5, 729). Ablabius was in high 
favor with Constantine for many years, and held the post of praef. 
praet. for at least six years (cf. Seeck, R.E. 1, 103). During one 
of these years (A.D. 331) he was also consul (cf. col. 111, 323 Palladiu 
Historia Lausiaca (ed. Butler), 2, 230, n. 102). 

What the people of Orcistus asked is clear from the two imperial 
rescripts. They begged (1, 43-44) ut sibi ius antiquum nomenque 
civitatis concederet. Vhis position the town had held in earlier days 
(cf. nominis et dignitatis reparationem, 1, 1-23 ad integrum prisct 
honoris reduxit, 1, 4 and 11, 5—6; cf. 11, 22-25). The town is now 
claimed as a vecus (cf. 1, 16) by the neighboring czvitas of Nacolia 
(I, 33-34). It has lost the right of self-government, and tribute 
for the aerarzum is apportioned among the people of Orcistus by 
the curzales of Nacolia (111, 14-23), and Orcistus probably has to 
pay a disproportionate share (cf. depraedatione potiorum, 1, 37-38). 
A decline in the prosperity of Orcistus may well have led to this 
change in her political status (cf. Isidore, Orig. 15, 2, 11, vici et 
castella et pagt sunt, quae nulla dignitate civitatis ornantur, sed vulgari 
hominum conventu incoluntur et propter parvitatem sui maioribus 
civitatibus attribuuntur). Mommsen in his comments on CIL. m1, 
352 cites the similar case of Equus Tuticus (C/L. rx, 2165) which 
lost its independent status and was attributed to Beneventum. It 
was probably with a view to proving the prosperity of Orcistus that 
its people descant on its roads (11, 27), aqueducts, baths, and statues 
(1, 20-31). Furthermore they were ardent Christians (1, 39-42), 
and this fact may have enlisted for them the favor of Ablabius, who 
was a strong supporter of the new faith (cf. R.E. 1, 103). Oppidum 
and cevitas are used in all these documents in a semi-technical way 


[ 494 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


of a self-governing community (cf. 1, 53 1, 173 1, 363 1, 43-44 

II, 233 11, 253 U1, 11), whose characteristics are defined in 1, 18-20. 
Civitas came to be the generic name for such a city and, after the 
promulgation of the constitutio Antoniana, crowded out colonia and 
municipium (cf. Kornemann, R.E., Suppl. 303). Legum...splendore 
(1, 6; 11, 8—g) suggests the phrase w#z suis legibus, used of the grant 
of autonomy, and /ibertatis privilegium (111, 13-14) suggests the 
same right, but the designation cruztas ibera would probably not 
have its old characteristic meaning at this time. It is interesting 
to notice that the Orcistani themselves in speaking of their town 
in its present status use the colorless word, patria (11, 22, 30, 32). 

Five years or more after the prayer of the Orcistani had been 
granted, Orcistus was still under the control of Nacolia. This 
situation called forth the second rescript, which, to make the zus 
civitatis of Orcistus effective, instructed the rationalis Asianae 
Dioeceseos (Hirschfeld, 35 ff-) to forbid Nacolia to require the 
payment of taxes from Orcistus. “These taxes, payable in kind in 
any form of produce receivable at the public granaries (speczes, 
cf. Mommsen, CJL. 11, 352), were commuted by a payment of 
money (cf. 1, 28-29). 

On the general form which these documents take, cf. pp. 237 ff. 
The first three, viz. the preces of the Orcistani, the decretum of 
the emperor, and the epzstu/a of Ablabius, are quite unconventional. 
No one of them bears a date. The letter of Ablabius has no znscriptio 
or salutation at the end. If Mommsen’s conjecture, decreti (1, 6), 
is accepted, we must take the word in a broad way of all kinds of 
imperial documents, rather than in the technical sense (cf. Hesky, 
R.E. 2289 f.). For adnotationis (1, 45), of. p. 241. Mommsen 
(CIL. 111, 8. 7000) surmises that the emperor’s adnotatio was on a 
stone now lost. In its contents the decretum follows very closely 
the preces of the people of Orcistus. “The last document is more 
systematic, with its zwscriptio (111, 1-9), the text proper (111, 10-30), 
and the subscriptio (111, 31). Rather exceptionally the place and the 
precise date are given at the beginning (11, 1-3). 


[ 495 ] 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


40 


45 


50 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


155. EDICTUM CONSTANTINI AD UMBROS 
(326-337 p. Chr.) 


CIL. x1, 5265; Dessau, 705; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 8, 25. 
meas 


Imp. Caes. F]. Constantinus | max. Germ. Sarm. Got. victor | 
triump. Aug. et Fl. Constantinus || et Fl. Iul. Constantius et FI. | 
Constans. | Omnia quidem, quae humani gene|ris societate(m) 
tuentur, pervigilium culrarwm cogitatione conplectimur; sed pro-|| 
visionum nostrarum opus maximus (s7c) | est, ut universae urbes, 
quas in luminibus provin|ciarum ac regionum omnium species et 
forma dis|tinguit, non modo dignitate(m) pristinam teneant, | sed 
etiam ad meliorem statum beneficentiae nos||trae munere prove- 
hantur. Cum igitur ita vos Tuscilae adsereretis esse coniunctos, ut 
instituto | consuetudinis priscae per singulos (szc) annorum vilces 
a vobis adque praedictis sacerdotes creentur, | qui aput Vulsinios 
‘Tusciae civitate(m) ludos || schenicos et gladiatorum munus exhi- 
beant, | sed propter ardua montium et iti|nerum saltuosa inpendio 
posceretis, ut indulto | remedio sacerdoti vestro ob editiones cele-| 
brandas Vulsinios pergere necesse non esset, || scilicet ut civitati, 
cui nunc Hispellum nomen | est quamque Flaminiae viae confinem 
adque con|tinuam esse memoratis, de nostro cognomine | nomen 
daremus, in qua templum Flaviae gentis | opere magnifico nimirum 
pro amplitudinem (szc) || nuncupationis exsurgeref, ibidemque zs | 
sacerdos, quem anniversaria vice Umbria deldisset, spectaculum 
tam scenicorum ludorum | quam gladiatorii muneris exhiberet, 
manente | per Tuscia (sec) ea consuetudine, ut indidem crellatus 
sacerdos aput Vulsinios ut solebat | editionum antedictarum spec- 
tacula fre|quentaref: precationi ac desiderio vestro | facilis accessit 
noster adsensus. Nam civi|tati Hispello aeternum vocabulum 
nomengq. || venerandum de nostra nuncupatione conces|simus, sci- 
licet ut in posterum praedicta urbs | Flavia Constans vocetur; in 
Culus gremio | aedem quoque Flaviae, hoc est nostrae gen|tis, ut 
desideratis, magnifico opere perfici || volumus, ea observatione per- 
scripta, ne ae|dis nostro nomini dedicata cuiusquam con|tagiose 
superstitionis fraudibus polluatur; | consequenter etiam editionum 
in prae|dicta civitate exhibendorum (szc) vobis || licentiam dedimus 


[ 496 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


scilicet ut, sicuti | dictum est, per vices temporis sollem|nitas edi- 
tionum Vulsinios quoque non delserat, ubi creatis e Tuscia sacer- 
dotibus memo|rata celebritas exhibenda est. Ita quippe nec || 
veteribus institutis plurimum videbitur | derogatum, et vos, qui ob 
praedictas causas | nobis supplices extitistis, ea quae inpen|dio 
postulastis, impetrata esse gaude|bitis. 

]l. 21. et difficultates itinerum: zad/ez. 

Marble slab found at Hispellum in Umbria in 1733. For more 
than a century this inscription was regarded as a forgery, based in 
part on CIL. x1, 5283 (Dessau, 6623), another document found 
on the site of Hispellum. In 1850, however, Mommsen removed 
all doubt of its authenticity (Ges. Schr. 8, 24 ff.), and published a 
long commentary on it. Its authenticity was established largely by 
a comparison with Constantine’s epistle to Orcistus (no. 154) which 
it resembles in language, in form, and in the titles employed, by 
the appearance of such archaic forms as conplectimur (|. 8), aput 
(I. 19), and zmpendio (1. 22), as well as by the nature of the request 
and Constantine’s reply to it. 

It is of course a rescript, as the initial letters (E.S.R. = exemplum 
sacrt rescriptt) indicate, and is a reply to a petition, or, as Mommsen 
prefers to characterize it (op. cit. 8, 33 ff.), “ein rescriptahnliches 
Edict” or lex edictalis. It bears no date, and therefore seems to 
violate Constantine’s own law of 322 (Cod. Th. 1. 1. 1), which 
rendered an edict without a date invalid, but the date may well 
have stood on the dedicatory stone (Mommsen, op. cit. 8, 29). 
From internal evidence it was evidently composed between a.p. 326, 
the date of the death of Crispus, and before Constantine’s death in 
337 (Mommsen, op. cit. 8, 32). Strangely enough the names of 
the persons addressed do not appear in the zuscriptio, but the docu- 
ment is evidently intended for the Umbrians. 

At this time Tuscia and Umbria had a common government 
under a corrector (cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 236, n. 2), and from 
this inscription it would appear that the province had a concilium 
at Volsinii, although there is no direct reference to such a body 
(cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 821 f.). At the annual meeting in Vol- 
sinii priests were elected, and plays and gladiatorial games given 
(ll. 17-20), but for the Umbrians the journey to Volsinii was hard 


AMA [ 497 ] 32 


35 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


and costly (1. 21). They therefore ask the emperor that they may 
not be required to go to Volsinii in the future (1. 24), that the 
emperor will give his name to Hispellum in Umbria, that they may 
found there a templum Flaviae gentis, choose a priest, and hold 
their annual plays and games, without interrupting the annual 
festival at Volsinii (ll. 27-34). The emperor grants their petition 
(ll. 36, 37) and allows Hispellum henceforth to bear the name Urbs 
Flavia Constans (ll. 41, 42). In Constantine’s decision con- 
cerning the proposed temple (Il. 44, 45) his half-Christian, half- 
pagan state of mind is evident. His tolerant attitude in this case is 
paralleled, as Mommsen observes (op. cit. 8, 37), by his permission 
to Africa to establish a templum gentis Flaviae. For the policy of 
his successors in such matters, cf. op. cet. 8, 21 ff. In defining gens 
Flavia as gens nostra, the emperor is of course distinguishing his 
own line from the Flavian emperors of the first century 

The particular interest which this document has for us lies in 
the fact that it illustrates the gradual substitution of the province 
for the municipality as the political and social unit in the empire, 
and may well bear evidence to the decline of municipal life. Under 
the republic and the early empire the city had been the recognized 
political unit, and it was with a city, or with a league of cities, that 
the senate or the emperor dealt. But from Constantine’s time on 
we see a distinct effort being made to establish direct relations 
between the provincials, especially through their assemblies, and 
the central government. The Codex of Justinian contains edicts of 
Constantine addressed ad Afros (12. 57. 1) of a.D. 315, ad Bithynos 
(11. 8. 1) of 317, ad Lusitanos (1. 23. 4) of 322, ad Afros (10. 21. I) 
of 327, and ad concilium provinciae Africae (2. 12. 21) of 315. There 
are three more addressed ad provinciales, one, provincialibus suts, 
two, ad universos provinciales, of which the earliest (8. 16. 7) is 
of the year 315, and eight ad populum. It is probable that every 
province was required to establish a concilium. At least this seems 
to have been the situation at the close of the fourth century (cf. 
Cod. Th, 12. 12. 13). The increase in the number of provinces 
from forty-five in A.p. 117 to one hundred and eight at the close 
of the fourth century (cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 489 ff-) meant 
a corresponding decrease in the size of each province, which made 


[ 498 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


it possible for the residents of a province to have interests in common 
and take common action to further them, and Diocletian and his 
successors may well have had this consideration in mind in de- 
creasing the size of the provinces (cf. Mommsen, ap. cit. 8, 32-333 
Kornemann, R.E. 4, 822 f.). 


156. TITULUS HONORARIUS 
(362-363 p. Chr.) 


CIL. v, 8987; Dessau, 755. 


Ab insignem singula|remque erga rem publicam | suam faborem | 
d(ominus) n(oster) [ulianus invictissimus prin||ceps remota provin- 
cialibus cura | cursum fiscalem breviatis mutationum spa|tiis fier 
iussit, | disponente Claudzo Mamertino v(iro) c(larissimo) per Ita| liam 
et Inlyricum praefecto praetorio, || curante Vetulenio Praenestio 
v(iro) p(erfectissimo) corr(ectore) | Venet(iae) et Histr(iae). 

l. 1. ab for ob. 


Found at Concordia, north-east of Venice. Cl. Mamertinus 
was praetorian prefect of Illyricum and Italy under Julian in 
362 and 363; cf. Gensel, R.E. 3, 2730. On the cursus publicus 
in the early empire, cf. no. 51. ‘(Vhe wrongs which the municipali- 
ties in the fourth century suffered at the hands of those who 
managed the post are graphically described by Libanius (Orat. 20), 
cited by Hudemann in Gesch. d. rim. Postwesens, 34. Draught 
animals were commandeered for the service; they were exhausted 
by long journeys, ill-fed, and sometimes turned loose on the high- 
way. [he accuracy of his statements is confirmed by the sixty-six 
constitutions of Title 5 of Bk 8 of the Theodostan Code. From 
constitutions, nos. 12, 13, 14, and 16, addressed to Mamertinus 
by Julian, we learn that he limited the number of passes (diplomata 
or evectiones) granted, and restricted to the emperor, the praetorian 
prefect, and the governor of a province the right to give them. In 
the Itimerarium Hzerosolymitanum of A.D. 333 there were thirty 
points at which the animals were changed (mutatzones) in a journey 
of 371 miles, and the distances covered by a single team varied from 
five to twenty-four miles; cf. Seeck, R.E. 4, 1855. Although the 


post is called the cursus fiscalis, it would seem from the constitutions 


[ 499 | 322 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


of the period that the cities were still obliged to furnish fodder for 
the animals, pay for the construction and repair of the manszones 
and stabula, and meet the expenses of the cross roads; cf. Humbert, 
Dict. Dar. 1, 1660. 


157. RESCRIPTUM VALENTINIANI VALENTIS GRATIANI DE 
MOENIBUS INSTAURANDIS ET DE REDITIBUS FUNDO- 
RUM CIVITATIUM ASIAE 


(371 p. Chr.) 


Anzeiger der Akad. der Wissen. in Wien, 1905, no. 10; Fahres- 
hefte d. ost. archGol. Inst. 8 (1905), Berblatt, 71 ff.; zbid. 9 (1906), 
4.0 f.; Bruns, 97a; Riccobono, p. 374. 

D.D.D. n.n.n. Auggg. Valentiniazus, Valens, Gratianus. Hab(e), 
Eutropi car(issim)e nobis. | 

Quod ex reditibus fundorum iuris rez publicae guos intra Asiam 
diversis quibusque civitatibus ad instaurandam moenium faczem,.... 
...pro certis | partzbus habita aestimatione concensimus capere 
quidem urbessingulas beneficii nostri uberem fructum et pro temporum 
refers felicitate nostrorum a foedo | przorum squalore ruinarum in 
antiquam sui faciem nova reparatione consurgere, verum non in- 
tegram gratzam concessi ad urbes singulas beneficii || pervenire si 
quidem pro partibus praestitis reditus civitatibus potius quam ipsi 
cum reditibus fundi fuerint restituezdi et ministrandi, idem reditus 
ab actorzbus | pribatae rei nostrae et diu miserabiliterque poscantur 
et vix aegreque tribuantur adque id quod amplius ex zsdem fundis 
super statutum canonem | colligatur, et isdem civitatibus pereat 
eorundemque actorum fraudibus devoratum nihil tamen aerario 
nostro adiciat augmenti possitque | a curialibus vel excultione maiore 
vel propensiore diligentia nonnullus praestitionis cumulus ad gratiam 
concessionis accedere, igitur cuncta diligenti coram investigatione 
perspeximus. | —-Et primum Efesenae urbi, quae Asiae caput est, 
missa ad nos dudum legatione poscentz || partem redituum non 
fundorum advertimus fuisse concessam; unde illi interim quam esse 
omnium maximam nulla dubitatio est, in parte com|cessa cum eo 
fundo quem Leucem nomine nostra iam liberalitate detentat, tradz 
centum iuga promulgata sanctione mandavimus, ut elus exemplo 
quid adhoc | ista in reparandis moenibus profecerit intuentes an 


[ 500 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


reliquis praestandum sit similia, decernamus. Hac sane quia ratione 
plenissima, quod intra Asiam rei publicae | iuga esse videantur 
cuiusque qualitatis quantumve annua praestatione dependant, man- 
suetudo nostra instructa cognovit, offerendam experientiae tuae | 
credidimus optionem, ut, si omnem hanc iugationem quae est per 
omnem diffusa provinciam, id est sex milia sentingenta triginta sex 
semis opima || adque idonea iuga, quae praeter vinum solidorum 
ad fixum semel canonem trea milia extrinsicus solidorum annua 
praestare referuntur, sed et septingenta tria deserta | et iam defecta 
ac sterilia 1uga quae per illa quae idonea diximus sustinentur, susci- 
pere propria praestatione non abnuis, petitis maiestas nostra con- 
sentzat, | scilicet ut arbitrio tuo per curias singulas omni iugatione 
dispersa retracto eo redituum modo quem unicuique civitatum pro- 
pria largitate concenszmus | reliquam summam per officium tuum 
rei privatae nostrae inferre festines, ut et omnem usuram diligentia 
avidis eripiamus actoribus et si quid extrinsicus | /ucri est cedat 
rationibus civitatum. Sane quia rerum omnium integram cupimus 
habere notitiam et ex industria nobis tuam expertam diligentzam || 
pollicemur, plena te volumus ratione disquirere per omnem Asiam 
provinciam fundos iugationemque memoratam, qui in praesentem 
diem hadita | /cttatione possideant et quantum per iuga singula rei 
privatae nostrae annua praestatione dependant, qui etiam opimi 
adque utiles fundi | fisco gratz szngulis quibusque potentissimis 
fuerint elocati et qui contra infecundi ac steriles in damnum rei 
nostrae paenes actores | fuerint dere/ictz scilicet ut omni per idoneos 
ratione discussa ac (?) confectis quam diligentissime brevibus man- 
suetudini nostrae veri | fidem nuntzes, ut zmstructi super omnibus 
amplissimum efficacis industriae praestantiae tuae testimonium 
deferamus. 

Eutropius, to whom this rescript was addressed, was governor 
of Asia in A.D. 371 (cf. Ammianus, 29. 1. 36, and Schulten, ‘Fahres- 
hefte d. ost. archdol. Inst. 9 (1906), 43 f.). The cities in Asia had 
suffered severely from earthquakes in 358 and 365 (Ammianus 
17. 7. 13 Libanius, 1, 621 (Reiske); Schulten, op. cit. 52). Further- 
more much of their land had been confiscated or reverted to the 
emperors and had been converted into imperial domains; cf. De- 
clareuil, Quelques problémes d’histotre des institutions municipales, 


[ 5or ] 


15 


20 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


332 f. Probably reference is made to the recent earthquakes in 
ll. 3-4. The setting of the rescript is thus explained by Heberdey 
(Fahreshefte d. ést. archdol. Inst. 9 (1906), 192). In 365 Valens 
arranged that certain cities of Asia should receive a part of the 
returns from some of the fund: ret publicae for the purpose of 
rebuilding their walls. The dishonesty of the managers of the 
domains led the governor of Asia to propose that the cities should 
be allowed to manage these properties themselves. “he plan was 
first tried in Ephesus, and finally this rescript was sent to Eutropius 
directing him to collect the revenue and divide it between the 
cities and the res przvatae of the emperor; cf. arbitrio tuo. . . festines 
(ll. 17 ff). For a somewhat different explanation, cf. Schulten, 
loc. cit. "The actores in Asia were evidently as venal as the procurators 
in Africa; cf. no. 111. The emperors complain that most of the 
revenue from the public lands goes, not to the cities, nor into the 
public treasury, but into the pockets of the officials (cf. I. 7). 
Schulten notes (/oc. c#t. 58 f.) that Valentinian had already issued 
two edicts (Cod. Th. 4. 13. 73 15. 1. 18), in one of which he directed 
Constantius, the proconsul of Africa, to devote a third part of the 
revenues from the fundi ret publicae to public works in the cities, 
and in 395 a constitution of Arcadius and Honorius (Cod. Th. 
15. I. 33) refers to the assignment of one third to the cities for the 
repair of their walls. Before Valentinian, Alexander Severus (Hist. 
Aug. Alex. Sev. 22, 44) and Constantius (Cod. Th. 4. 13. 5) had 
given a part of the vectigalia, in Africa one fourth, to the repair 
of the walls and public works of provincial cities. The central 
government took up the matter of repairing the walls of cities on 
the borders of the empire because of the barbarian invasions which 
began about this time; cf Ammianus, 26. 4. 5. For the canon, 
cf. Leonhard, R.E. 3, 1486; for the zugatio and iuga, cf. pp. 130 ff. 
In |. 15 probably vi or vir has been corrupted into vinum. 


[ 502 ] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


158. RESCRIPTUM IMPERATORUM VALENTINIANI VALENTIS 
GRATIANI AD FESTUM PROCONSULEM ASIAE DE LUDIS 
PROVINCIALIBUS 

(375 p- Chr.) 
Bruns, 97. 
D.D.D.n.n.n. Auggg. Valentinianus, Valens, Gratianus. Habe (?) 

Feste car(isstme) nob(is). | 

Honorem Asiae ac totius provincige dignitatem, quae ex iudi- 
cantis pendebat arbitrio, exemplo Illyric? adque Jtalarum urbium 
recte perspeximus | esse firmatum. Nec enim utile videbatur, u¢ 
penpa conventus publici unius arbitrio gereretur, quam consuetz- 
dinis instaurata deberet solemnitas | exhibere. Ex sententiis denigue 
factum est, quod divisis officiis per quattuor civitates, quae metro- 
polis apud Asiam nominantur, lustralis cernitur editzo (?) || consti- 
tuta, ut, dum a singulis exhzbitio postulatur, non desit provinciae 
coronatus nec gravis cuiquam erogatio sit futura, cum servatis 
vicibus quzm|to anno Civitas praebeat editorem. Nam et z//ud quoque 
libenter admisimus quod in minoribus muwnicipiis generatis, quos 
popularis animi gloria maior | attollit, facultatem tribui edendi 
muveris postulasti, videlicet ut in metropoli Efesena ada e civitate 
asiarchae sive alytarchae procedan¢ ac sic | officiis melioribus nobili- 
tate contendamt. Unde qui desideriis sub seculi nostri felicitate 
ferventibus gaudiorum debeamus fomenta praesfare cele|brandae 
editionis dedimus potestatem, adversum id solum voluntatem con- 
trariam referentes, ne suae Civitatis obliti ezus in qua ediderint || 
munera curiae socientur, Feste carissime ac iucundissime. Laudata 
ergo experientia tua nostri potius praecepta sequatur arbitrii, ut 
omnes | qui ad hos hoores transire festinant, cunctas primitus Civi- 
tatis suae restituant functiones, u¢ peractis curiae muneribus ad 
honorem totius | provinciae debito fabore festinent percepturi 
postmodum, si tamen voluerint, senatoriam dignitatem, zta tamen, 
ut satisfacientes legi in locis sus | alteros deserant substitutos. 

Ceterum nequaquam ad commodum credimus esse iustitiae, ut 

expensis rebus suis laboribusque transactis | veluti novus tiro ad 

curiam transeat alienam, cum rectius honoribus fultus in sua debeat 
vivere Civitate. 


Io 


Thy texunv ths Acias kal bAns THS errapyias TO dkiwpua, Sep II 


ses) 


IO 


15 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 
Kal ék THs érikplcews HpTNTO TOV apxovToS, €& UTrodlypwaTos TOD 
"Trvupixod Kal rév [t]js Itadias | rodewv opOds Aeiav Kare- 
vonoamev StaxexpicOa. Ore yap dAvatTedes evomifero THY 


“rout thls] cvvddov tis Snwootas évds yvoun rpat[re]oOar, | 


A[v] é« cvvnOias éravtpéyovTes of ypdvot amntovy. “Axorovbas 
Toivuv vyeyévntas err tpelp lic Onvas Tovs Kpovous eis TAS TEcoapas 
Tones, aiteves | untpotores év “Acia Wndilovtat, ws THY THS 
TevTaeTnploos éxdoalW TOLAUTHY EYXELV THY KATAOTACLY Kal UNdE- 
maote Suvacbat deElTrew || TOV KoTMOvMEVOY UTO TOD THS Acias 
atepavov. Ard ote érupoptifea bai Tis SUvaTat U6 TOU SaTravn- 
LaTos, éTav wardioTa aporBadov TpexXovTwv | TAY ypovev éExacTn 
TOV MNTPOTOAEWV META TEVTAETH TOV YpovoY OLOwaLY TOY ALTOUP- 
yjlolovra. Kairos idéms mpoonkapeda eri trep Tovs Te|yOévtas 
év Tals pkpals ToAEoL, éeTrav SnMmoTLKWTEpAS yevaduEVvoL WuXTs 
Tov émawvov Tov éx Tov dnuov fhavTdlwvte, eEovaiay avrTots | 
Tmapéyer bas Tod év TH Edeotov untporro[A Jet wovn THv acvapxtav 
THY aduTapyiayv avTov avvew Kal Tois KaOHKOLS TOs KANALOTLY 
ex THS émipavous | NevToupyias paiverbat. “OBev, erred ex THS 
EVLOLPLAS TOV KALpO@V TOV HuEeTepov at érLOvpiat ai TALOVa THY 
éopTnv éxovaat ofirovaw avé&eo Fat || Kal Tap nudy avTav éxevv 
THY oTroVonY, BovrAoMEvols avTOLs NELTOUPYEtY Tapéyopmev AOLaY, 
Els TOUTO ovoyv dtacharsGopevor Tovs ToLovTous, iva ply] | TOV 
idiwv Torewv érrtravOavomevot TavTn éauTOvs meTaypahova.y, 
Pjorte tiumotate Kal tpocpiréotate. “H érrasvetn évrecpia cov 
TOD nweTepor Oe |o| TiguaTos akoAOVONTAaTw TH yvoun Kal TavTaAs 
TOUS els TAUTHY THY TUnY ETLTPEYOVTAaS Tadaas TpOTEpoY TAS 
eTOUpyias TH éavTod TOAEL aTTOTANpOdY | TpocTaEaTo, TANPO- 
Oévt@y dé TOV ALTOUPYNMLATOV Els THY TLUNY THY piCova, TOUTéTTLY 
dAns THS [é]rrapyias omevdovew avTols ddiav TapexéTo, Suva- 
pévors peta] | tadta kal To TOV RautpoTaTtav akiwpa 
k[a]t[ad JévyecOar, ob tws pévToL, @S TPOTEpoY avTovs TO iKaVOV 
TOLovYTAS TH Vow Els TOV éaUT@V TOTTOY UTOKAabicTaV(TaL) 
rats ||| éavtav tatpacw érépovs. Odte dé Erépo[ Oe A JuouTErety 
vevopikapev avtots, iva avadwa(a)yTes Ta éavToy peTa TOvS 
Tovous TOV AELTOUpynuaTav aTralxOels| | @s veapos Tipwyr els 
étepov Bol vAeut |n[ pro |v EauTov petaypade: ohirov év TH (é)avtod 
(wa)AXov [|v Te Kal haiverOat TworeL. 


[eo 504%] 


FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 


The provincial games at this period were held in four cities in 
the province of Asia, and the liturgy of asiarch or alytarch could 
legally be held only by residents of those cities. Citizens of other 
cities in the province were ambitious to attain these honors, and by 
this rescript the emperors gave them permission to hold these offices 
on condition that they first perform all the regular liturgies of their 
place of origin (cf. Cod. Th. 15. 5. 1). The performance of these 
liturgies in a metropolitan city did not confer citizenship in that 
city, and these aspirants for provincial honors from the smaller 
towns could not renounce their allegiance to their local curia (cf. 
Cod. Th. 12. 1. 106). In this period it is evident that citizens 
sought this method of escape from the obligations of their native 


place (Cod. Th. 12. 1. 176). Cf. Fahreshefte d. dst. arch. Inst. 
8 (1905), Betblatt, 74 ff. 


159. TITULUS HONORARIUS 


(376 p. Chr.) 
CIL. v1, 1736; Dessau, 1256. 
Hymetii. — | ...Iulio Festo Hymetio c. y., | correctori Tusciae 


et Umbriae, praetori urbano, | consulari Campaniae cum Samnio, || 
vicario urbis Romae aeternae, proconsuli | provinciae Africae, ob 
insignia eius | in rempublicam merita et ob depulsam | ab eadem 
provincia famis et inopiae vastitatem | consiliis et provisionibus, et 
quod caste || in eadem provincia integreque versatus est, | gvod neque 
aequitati in cognoscendo | neque iustitiae defuerit, quod studium | 
sacerdotii provinciae restituerit | ut nunca conpetitoribus adpetatur || 
quod antea formidini fuerit: ob quae eadem | provincia Africa, 
decretis ad divinos principes | dominos nostros missis | Walentem 
Gratianum et Valentinianum | perpetuos Augustos, || statuam unam 
apud Carthaginem sub auro, | alteram quoque Romae eidem sub 
auro | postulandam esse credidit, quod nulli | proconsulum vel ex 
proconsulibus | statuendam (szc) antea postularit. (Jn /atere) dd. nn. 
Valente V et Valentiniano coss..... 


Found in Rome. Hymetius’ proconsulship in Africa began in 
366 (cf. Cod. F. 3. 61. 13 Cod. Th. 9. 19. 3). This inscription 
furnishes proof of a conci/ium in Africa Proconsularis in the fourth 
century. Several other references to this conctlium are found in 


Lins Osi 


Io 


T5 


20 


Io 


MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 


the Codices, e.g. Cod. F. 2. 12. 21; Cod. Th. 11. 30. 15. The steps 
which Augustus (cf. Cass. Dio, 56. 25) and Nero took (cf. Tac. 
Ann. 15. 22) to prevent provinces from passing complimentary 
decrees in honor of a governor were evidently ineffective. Several 
such decrees are extant, e.g. CIL. x, 1430-1432, 38533 I, 1412, 
1741. On the concilia, cf. pp. 162 ff. 


160. INDEX SODALIUM FAMILIAE PUBLICAE 
(saec. IV p. Chr. ?) 


CIL. xtv, 255; Dessau, 6153. 
Familia Publica: 


Ost. Herme _ s tab. Onesimu_ s 
Dionysiu — s ark. Ost. Callistu  s 
Euaristu — s ark. Geminius Trophimianus 

Ost. Eutychu  s Ost. Appianu  s 

Ost. Asclepiade s Vetulenius Primion 

Ost. Liberali  s Mamidia Hygia 

Ost. Primio  n Ost. Sabinu S 

Ost. Polygonu s Mumius Luciu s 
Faustu ss Onesimu_ s 

Ost. Epafroditu s Ost. Sanctus $ 


(seguuntur alia nomina sexaginta et unum). 


Found at Ostia. Into this college even freemen (e.g. Geminius 
Trophimianus) were admitted. For the tabularius and arkarius 


of collegia, cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 423 f. 


161 DECRETUM PROVINCIAE AFRICAE 
(saec. IV p. Chr.?) 


CIL. vu, S. 11017. 


Genio senatus | ob reparatam | iustitiam, | servata defen||saque 
p(rovincia) A(frica), | Gigthenses | publice ex | d(ecreto) p(rovin- 
ciae) A(fricae). 

Found at Gigthi in the provincia Tripolitana. It records the 
passage of a resolution in the concilium, probably of Africa Procon- 
sularis, expressing gratitude to the Roman senate, probably for the 
conviction and punishment of an unjust governor, against whom 


the province had made charges. On Gigthi, cf. no. 115. 
[ 506 ] 


II. DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


162. EDICTUM L. AEMILI RECTI DE ANGARIA 
(42 p. Chr.) 


P. Br. Mus. 1171; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 439. 


Nevdxuos Aipirrss ‘Pyxtos reyes. | Mndevt é&éorw evyapevew 
Tous emt THS ywpas | unde épddia 7) dAXO TL Swpeay aiteiv aTEp 
tod | éuold] durA@paros, Aap[Blavew S¢ Exac[to]y Tar || éy[dv- 
T lov épov ditrAwpa Ta avTaapKe: EmLdynTLa | TiunY atrodidovTas 
avtav. "Eav o€ tis | unvvOne 7) tév otpatevopévwy 1 TaV 
paxatpodopa(y) | 7 datis ody tov brypetav Taly év Tals 
Snpoaliais]| ypryais mapa t]o éwov dudtalyp la [or lerronnas 7 
BeBiacl||uévos tiva TOV aTro THS Ywpas 7) apyuporoyiaas, | KaTa 
TOUTOU THL avVaTAaTML YpHoouar Terwptar. | ("ETous) B TiBepiou 
Kravdiouv Kaicapos 2eBactod Adtoxpatopos | Teppavixod 6. 

]. 3. arep rov is a correction made by the scribe for arep. 
1. 5. avradpxe. Wilcken; aira & dpxet Grenfell-Hunt, Archiv, 4, 539. 


2 , > , 
eriOnTla= €TLTNOELA. 


Beginning with the edict of Germanicus in a.p. 19 (Preisigke, 
Sammelbuch, 3924), we find a number of edicts issued by various 
prefects of Egypt designed to check the extortions practised by 
soldiers and officials in the villages. Cf. nos. 163, 165. In spite 
of the fact that Egypt was under the direct supervision of the 
emperor, it is evident that the control of the soldiery in the outlying 
regions was a difficult problem in the very beginning of the empire. 
Although the severest penalties are threatened, the frequent repeti- 
tion of similar edicts shows that the penalties were not inflicted, 
and the abuses remained unchecked. It is probable that the imperial 
provinces where soldiers were stationed suffered in the same way, 
but documentary evidence is lacking until the third century. Cf. 
nos. 139, 141-144; Rostowzew, Kio, 6 (1906), 249 ff. 


[ 507 ] 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


163. EDICTUM CN. VERGILI CAPITONIS PRAEFECTI 
(49 p. Chr.) 


CIG. 3, 4956 (cf. Add., p. 1236); Lafoscade, 119; Ditt. Or. Gr. 
665. 


lal \ A / 
TloowSevios otpatnyos. | Ths meupGetions pos 70 Tov KuUpiou 
A a \ 
Hryewovos | érruaToAns ody THL UTTOTETAYMLEVaOL TpoTTay|uaTL TA 
> / e a e / ene 80 > \ \ > Qn 
avtiypada tpmelv brotétaxa, tv’ €i6dl\[tes] adta Kat [evr JesOjre 
Kat pndev Urevavtiov Tols mpoa|[TeTaypévo lis troun[ te]. “Ent 
éro[us] évatrou TiBepiov KrXaviiou Kaicapos | [XeBactod Tep- 
pavi|xod Avtoxpdtopos Meyelp €’. | 
Ty[(atos) Ovepyiduos Katitav Locedavior, srpatnyar 
‘Odcelaws | OnBaidos, yaipew.“O ért] THs worews [mp loeOnka 
didtaypa, || [trovTou avtiypadgor | éreuwra ol[ot]. BovrAouas odv 
[cle év | [rayes v] te THe untporore Tod vosod Kal Kal 
é[x|actov toro lv avTo mpobeivar cadbéct kal evonpors | [ypau- 
~ \ av / \ ¢ S725 a / 
paow |, va [wav |ri [é« ]dnra yévntar Ta br? éuod [ctabévtal. | 
Tvatos Ovfepyi ]Avos Kazritov révyes. || Kai marae wev neovov 
twas Satavas adixous Kal Tapanroyto[Oei|o las bro Tay TeEO- 
VEKTLKOS Kal avatdas Tals éEovciats arro|ypwpuévav yeiverOar, 
\ lal N > a a / U by4 € / d/ 
kal vov de év tTHL TOY AtBv@v partota | éyvav trobéce, OTL 
avadioKeTal Twa apralovtwy ade|Os TaV él Tals xXpElats WS 
UmoKeimeva eis Satravas || Kat Eévia (€)avT@y Ta NTE VTA PTE 
b f 5 e / \ Agee A 2. A id 
odetrovTa eivat, | omoiws dé Kal avyaperdy ovomaTtt. Ato KerXev@(t) 
Tovs | dvodevovtas Sia TOV VvoMeV oTpaTLMTAaS Kal ites Kal | 
oTaTOpas Kal ExaToVTAapYas Kal YeLluapyYous Kal Tovs (No)L| TOS 
amavtas pndev NapBavew pnde avyapevew ei py || Tuves éwa 
SuTrA@paTa Eyovow* Kal TovUTous 5é oTéyne povov Oé|yvecOaL 
Tovs Ovepyouéevous, UrroKeiwevov Te undéva pndev Tpat|Tew éEw 
tov vT0 Makiwou otabévtav. “Kay b€ tis dat 7) @s Se|dopévov 
Noyiontat Kai eiompakéne Snuociat, TodToOv TO Sexatrody | 
éya(t) exmpaka(t) ob avtos érpakey TOV vouov, Kal THL pnvU- 
cavtt || TO TeTpaTAAG LOY Epos Swaa(t) éx THs TOD KaTaKpLOérTOS 
ovaias. | O[¢ pev odv BlacidtKol ypappartels Kal K@pmoypap- 
patels Kal ToTToypau|[ wart lets Kata vouov Tavta éca Saravarat 
éx Tod vomod, el twa | Trémpaxtat Tapadrdcyws 7) AXXO TL ava- 
, Nai? ¢e f ter > f e ’ 
ypagléc |Owcav kai é[v hyépars] | éEnxovta éridotwmcay oi § 


[ 508 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


é[v ros OnBaidos dia TeTpapnvou, [eis TA] || NoycoTHpLa Kal pds 
Baowdreldnv tov Kaicapos amedevOepov ta &€& éxaa|tov roye- 
oTnptov, Kal Tovs ékNoyioTAas TeuTréTwWaaY, iy éav TL Tapa TO 
di|Kacov NeAoyeupévoyv 7 TeTpayyuévoyv HL, ToVTO SiopPacopar: 
‘Opoiws | S8[é] BovrAopar SnrotcGar........ (reliqui versus, 
maxime mutili, omissi sunt.) 


This inscription is engraved on the great temple at Girgeh. The 
prefect sent a copy of the edict to the strategus in command of 
the Thebaid with instructions to publish it in various places. “The 
tenor of the edict is similar to that of nos. 113, 139, 141, 162, 165; 
cf. P.S.I. 446. Here we have the confession of the prefect that 
complaints of the exactions of soldiers and officials had long been 
known to him, but apparently no action had been taken until the 
Libyans had appealed to him. In this edict the punishment is more 
explicit than that prescribed in no. 162. The prefect promises to 
exact tenfold from anyone who makes exactions without a requisi- 
tion, and a reward of fourfold is to be given to the informer. 


164, EDICTUM L. LUSI GETAE DE 
IMMUNITATE SACERDOTUM 


(54 p. Chr.) 

Lafoscade, 120; Ditt. Or. Gr. 664; Milne, Greek Inscriptions, 
DELL 

Aotvowos [Téras] KrXavdios Avoa|vias otparnydés “Apowvoet- 
tov | xaipecy. Td brroyeypappévon | éxOewa mpodes ev ois KaOnxer || 
Tov vomov ToToLs, iva TavTes | (€)idaot TA UT éwod KEeevopera. | 
"Eppoco. | Aov«os Aovotos [Véras] Néyeu. | “Ered “Apowvoetrov 
tepets Oeod || Soxvorraiov évérvxov poe | AéyovTeEs els yewpyias 
dryecOat, | TovTovs pev atrodvat)> éav | bé Tis eEerXeyyOHe Ta 
tm éwod | admak Kexpyéva 7 tpootal|yOérvta Kewwvnoas 7) Bov- 
ANGels | audiBora troujoa:, cata [w]av | ) apyupixas 7) 
copatixas | coAacOnoeras. L 1d’ TiBepiov | KXavdiov Kaicapos 
LeBactod, || Pappovii cv’. 


This inscription is carved on a stone now in the Museum of 
Cairo. The edict of the prefect indicates the desire of the govern- 
ment to control the license of subordinates who had apparently 


[ 509 ] 


35 


La 


oO 


20 


Io 


§I 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


been guilty of disregarding the orders issued from the office of the 
prefect (cf. nos. 162, 163, 165). On the position of the priesthood 
in Egypt under the empire see the commentary on no. 178; Otto, 
Priester und Tempel, passim. 


165. EDICTUM TIBERI IULI ALEXANDRI PRAEFECTI 
(68 p. Chr.) 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 669; CIG. 4957 (cf. vol. 3, ddd. p. 1236); Ricco- 
bono, p. 253; Girard, p. 174. 

Tovrvos Anpntpios, otpatnyos “Oacews @nBaidos. Tod 
meudhOévtos wot ScaTadypmartos UTr0 TOD KUpLoU HryEe“ovos | TuBepiou 
‘TovAiou “AdXeEavopouv To avtiypadov tev vméraka, iv eiddtes 
aToNavnte Tov evepyectov. L B’ Aoveiov AtBiov YeBactod 
Lovamcxtou | Tara Avtoxpatopos Pawdi a’ ‘lovriar LeBacrHe. 

TuBépuos “lovrAos AX€Eavdpos Aéyet. Lldcav mpovotav trovov- 
pevos TOU SLapéevery TOL TpooHKovTL KalTacTHMaTL THY TOALWY 
atroNavovaay TOV EvEepyert@v as Eyer Tapa Tov YeBactay Kal 
tov thv Aiyurtov év evotabeiar dudyoucay evOvpws vmnpetety 
THe TE EVOnViaL Kal THL meylal||THL TOY viv KaLpOv evdatmovias, 
pnt) Bapvvopéevnv Kawvats Kal adixols eiomrpdkeat* oyedov bé && 
ov THs ToAEws eTEBNY KaTAaBowpmevos UTO THY évTUYYaVoYTwV 
Kal Kat odiyous Kal Kata TAHON(L) TOV Te évOade EVoynNMoveE- 
OTATOV Kal TOV YempyoUVTwV THY Kwopav pEe“pomevaY TAS eyyLoTA 
yevouévas émnpelas, ov StéXLTTIOV eV KATA THY EwavTod SvvapmLy 
Ta éreiyovta | emavopOovpevos: iva dé evOupmoTtepor Tata éXri- 
Ente Tapa Tov émiNapavTos tuely emt cwTNplaLt TOU TavTOs 
avOpeTrav yévous evepyétou LeBactod Avtoxpatopos 'aXBa ra 
Te Tpos cwTnpiay | Kal TA Tpos aTeXaVGLW,, Kal yLvVOaKNTE TL 
eppovtica THY pos THY bueTépay BonOeav avnKovTwr, Tpoé- 
ypara avayKkaiws Tept ExdoTOUTOY ETLENTOULEVOV, Ooa eEETTi LOL 
Kpel|vewv Kai Troveiv, TA dé weiCova Kal Sedpue(va) THs Tod avToKpa- 
TOPOS SUVAMEWS Kal MEyANELOTNTOS AVTOL SNAOT@(t) wEeTA TATNS 
arneias, THY Gedy Tamievoapévov els TOUTOY Tov || fepwTaToV 
Kalpov THY THS OlKOUpEVNS aohareav. ~“Eryvwy yap wpod TavTOsS 
evAOYwTaTHY ovoav THY évTevEwW UuoV UTép TOD pH(L) akovTas 
avOpa@trous eis TeN@veEias 7(L) GA|Aas prcO@cets OVTLAKAS Tapa 
To Kowdov [€|00s Tay érapxYerov mpos Biav ayerOat, Kal OTL OvK 


[ 510 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


or[iy ]o[c] EBrAaWe Ta mpaypata TO TrOAXOvS arretpous bvTAS 
a / a ? / 
THS Tovav|TnS TpayywaTtetas ayOnvas pet avayKns ériBrANOévtTwr 
a a A 4 , 
avutols Tov TeAoV. AtoTep Kal avTos ovTE Hyayov Tiva eis 
J x / A v TAN a 4 
Terovetav H(t) picOwow ovte aEw(t) eid@s TodTo | supdépery 
Lal ~ / 
Kal Tals Kuptakals Wows TO weTa TpoOUplas ExovTAS Tpayua- 
/ \ /, f Ve Cf ba we) > \ / 
teveo0as tovs dSuvatovs. Llémresvopas 56 OT ovd Ets TO wédXdOV 
dkovras tis der Terwvas | H(t) wtcOwras, ad\XrAA StapicOace 
Tois BovAropévors Exovaiws mpo(c)épxecGat, madAroV THY TOV 
TpoTépwv eTapyov aidviov cvvnleav duvrdoowr i(t) THY TpoC- 
Katpov Tivos adsxtay || petwnoduevos. "Erresd7(t) eveoe 
mpopdce, TaV dnuociwy Kat addAOTpLa Savera Trapaywpovpevot 
els Te TO TPaKTOpELoyv TLVas Trapédocay Kal eis GANAS duAakKds, 
as Kat Ov avto TodTo | éyvwy dvaipeOeicas, iva ai mpakeus TOV 
A / A 
Saveiwv €x TOV UTapYOVvTMY wat Kal p(t) eK TOV Tomato, 
éErropevos THL TOV Oeod YeBaatod BovrAnoer Kerev(t) undéva THe 
TaY Onhociwy mpopalce. Tapaywpeicba. Tap ad\Xr\ov Sdvera a 
pnt) avtos €& apyns edavercev, prt) & brAws KaTaKrElec bai 
> / 3 \ € la) > \ A > 
Tivas érevOépous eis huraKHY HYTLVODY, Et w(t) KAKODpYOV, wd 
els TO Tpak|Topetov, éEw(s) TOV opeirovTwV els TOV KUPLAKOV 
NOYOV.. ove cece cece ce ceceee EvetevyOny O€ Kal Tepl TOY aTe- 
lal \ lal > e > \ \ / > f 
NELMV KAL KOUPOTEAELWY, EV ALS EOTLY KAL TA TpocooLKa, a&vovvTav 
avtas puraayOjvat, @s 0 Beds Kravdzios | éypaer Toorop. 
aTroNvwY, Kal AeyovTaY VaoTEepov KaTaKkexpiabat TA UTO iOLwTav 
mpayOévta év TOL wéTwL Ypovar peta TO PrAdKKOV KaTaKpeEtvat 
x \ A \ \ / , la) >] x 5 \ 
Kat Twpo Tod Tov Bedv | KrAavdiov amrordaa. *Emel obv kai 
BarBiarndos Kal Ovnoreivos tavta amédvaav, auhotépwrv TaVv 
emdpyov émixplipata puraccat) Kal exelvov KaTNKONOVONKOTwY 
THe | rob Oeod KXavétov yapits, Mote aTrohedvaOat Ta pndérra(t) 
é& aitayv eiompayOévta, SnrovoTs eis TO AOLTOY THPOUMEVNS 
avTOIs THS ATEdElAaS Kal KOUPOTENELAS. 66... eee eee ee eee 
"Axorovboy dé eat Tais Tov YeBaotay | yapict Kai TO Tods 
n > a nn 
évryevets AndeEavdpets Kai év thi [y@l]pas dia direpylav Katou- 
fa) 3 / / yy ew i¢ a ff 
KovvTas els undeutay [NEecToupylay ayerOat, 0 Vues] | ToANAaKLS 
\ > 4 > Ni be / e/ , la) 
pev emelntncate, Kavtos b€ dvddoow(t), wate undéva TOV 
évyevov AreEavdpéwr els Nevtoupyias ywptxas ayecOar. Medjoes 
dé || wou Kal Tas oTpaTnyias peta Staroytopov Tmpos TpLEeTlay 
/ a 
évy(e)epiferv Tots KaTacTAOnaopmevols.... 1... eee eee eee fl Ove 


Paste) 


15 
§2 


§4 


§6 


$7 
35 


45 
IO 


50 


she) 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


ayvoa(t) & OTt moAdnY mpovoravy oveicbe Kal Tod THY 
Aiyurrov év evotabetar Sralpéverv,] €E& ns [as ets tov Biov 
amavta| | yopnylas éyete, boa olov te nv érnvapOwoapnp. 
"Evérvyov yap pot moddaKis of Kal” 6Anv THY Xa@paVY yewp- 
yoovtes Kal €d4XwGaY OTL TOAAA KaLVas KaTEKpiOncal VY, KaiTrep 
SHrov dv dca Set | Pépesv] TeAéopata oitiKa Kal apyupiKd, 

\ b 4 lal lA > a A / 

Kat ovk é£ov Tots BouvNopevors evxepa@s Ka0orLKoy TL KaLviCerv. 
Tatra dé Kat Ta ToLadTAa KaTaKpimata ovK él THY OnBaida 
povnv [evpov éxrervopeva | ov dé él Tods roppa(t) vowods THs 

/ / > \ \ \ , iad / + 
KaT@O(L) YMOpas, GANA Kal Ta TpoaaTLa THS TOdEews EbOacer 

/ ? / / / \ \ / 
thv te AreEavdpéwy Kadoupéevnv yopav Kat tov Mapeortny 
[AaBetv. Ard Kerevw | Tolis Kata vowov otpatnyois va el 
TLVA KALWOS THL eyyloTa TEVTAETiaL TA [47)(L) TPOTEpOV TEAOVMEVA 
Kkaborixos H(t) TwANOcKaS vowav H(t) ToTraplyi@v 7) KoMev 
ceveececeeee || KalrexpiOn(s), TadTa ets THY TpoTépav Tdakw 
ATOKATACTHTWOW, TApEVTES AUT@V THY aTraitnow, A Kal éri 

\ \ > / e] lal > / 

Tov diaroyiopov ayOevta éx Tov [......... eEaipeOyto. | 
5 , > ee a \ / \ \ 7 5] / A 

Eéj7 aca 8 éte Kal mpotepov Kal THY awetpov é£ovciay THY 
éyNoyioT@yv Ova TO Tapvtas avTov KataBoady éri Tet Trapa- 

, 9 \ a > a POL b] Q / > e / 
ypahew avtovs TAEloTa éx THs tdtas érvOu|uias:] éE ob cuvé- 
Bawev avtovs pev apyuplifecOar, Thy dé Aiyurrov avdotatov 

vA \ n na > tal A \ > ¢ / 
yeiverOar. Kal viv tots avtots tapayyéd\Aw undey && oporw- 
peal ros | ru lypadev ad[r layfe Addo Te TOV KAMONOV Ywpls Tod 
Kpetvar Tov érapyov. Kereva(s) O€ Kal Tois otpatnyots ponder 
Tapa éyAoyioTav peTadauBavery ywpis tH[s adetas | Tod] 
érdpyou. Kat oi addou 6€ mpayuatixol, éav TL evpeOdar vrevdées 
A(t) mapa To Séov mapayeypadotes, Kal Tois idudTats arrodd- 
covow dcov amnitnOncay Kal 76 [icov| || amort(e)icovew eis TO 
OnMmoglov.........+..+(reliqui versus omissi sunt.) 

From Khargeh. This inscription is most important for a study 
of the policy of the imperial administration in attempting to correct 
abuses in the government of Egypt. The large number of similar 
edicts found in Egypt show that the problem of good administration 
was difficult even in a country under the direct supervision of the 
emperor. ‘he edict is published in fifteen sections each dealing 
with a specific problem. In §1 the prefect forbids the practice of 
compulsion in contracting for the collection of taxes and in the 


[ 512 ] 





DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


leasing of public lands (yA odavaxny). For the difficulty in securing 
contractors for farming the taxes, see no. 167. A similar law pre- 
vailed in other parts of the empire (Dig. 39. 4. 9, 13 49. 14. 3, 6), 
although in cases where no bidders were forthcoming former 
contractors were compelled to take the contract on the same terms 
as their original bid (Dig. 39. 4. 11, 5). In § 2 the prefect corrects 
an abuse which had developed in the capitals of the nomes where 
the local magistrates had been guilty of seizing the property of 
debtors and confining them in the public prisons, although the law 
forbade the distraint of a person for debt, unless he owed the 
imperial treasury. In § 4 we find that those who enjoyed immunity 
of various kinds and those who occupied lands such as the yf 
m@poaooou, on which there was a lighter tax than on other imperial 
property, were deprived of their privileges by former governors. To 
citizens of these classes Julius confirms their former rights. In § 6 
we learn that citizens of Alexandria resident in other parts of Egypt 
were exempt from local liturgies. The full liturgical system was not 
introduced into Egypt until later, and it is probable that, when it 
finally became a part of the Egyptian administrative policy, the 
Alexandrians were released from all local, but not from imperial, 
liturgies (cf. no. 173; p. 103). In §§ 10 and 11 the prefect forbids 
the superexactions imposed by officials in the nomes. ‘The legal 
assessment and the quota of taxation was determined every fourteen 
years. Officials had arbitrarily increased the quota and had grown 
rich by appropriating the excess. They are ordered to restore the 
amount of their illegal extortions for the five years preceding the 
publication of the edict and to pay an equal sum to the public 
treasury. 


166. DE CENSU é@dexadpdypov 
(86-87 p. Chr.) 


P. Oxy. 258, ll. 4-26; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 216. 


Aiddvpou tov am’ Ofuptyy[ev modews ||| em’ auBodov Uvpeviris. 
Kara ra | xpidévta émt tév mpocBeBnkotor | is Tprskardexa- 
eTets, ef €E dugoré| pwr yovéwy pn[T |poTovert av da|dexadpax pov 
e[io liv, érayn él || Tob avrod audddov 6 v{[ids lov ...-.|os 10 


AMA ; Pp srae | 33 


On 


5 


20 


25 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


untpos Oeweiros ths [Ac]dduou | mpocBéBnnev eis tpicKac- 
Sexaletet|s | Tt eveota@re. (Ete) AvdToxpat[opos] | Kaicapos 
Aopittavod YeBaorod || Vepyavixod. “OOev trap ja[yevoue ||vos 
is tHv TovTou én[ixptow (SnA@) ef ||vas éue KATA T........-. 
... | eat tov tHALs pn |r[pos adtod warté]|pa Aidvpov ...... 
NERO || avaypadopevov evo........ | ea auodou 
PR PRS os Kat Te]|TeNeUTNKE TlOL...... éret Népw]|vos cal 
épvil[w Avtoxpdtopa Kaicapa] | Aousteavov Xe[Bacrtov Tep- 
pavixor | || adnOH eivar [ta mpoyeypaupuéva]. | "Etous éx[7]ou 
[Avroxpatopos Kaicapos] Aopitifavod SeBacrod Teppavixod 


From Oxyrhynchus. The documents which deal with the re- 
gistration of citizens, especially with the epzcriszs, or scrutiny of 
those who claim more favored treatment, are important for the 
study of the different gradations in the status of the residents of 
Egypt. Distinctions of a similar kind are traceable in Asiatic towns 
(cf. pp. 75 f.), but little is known of the status of the various classes 
outside of Egypt. he present state of our information in regard 
to the epzcrists is summarized by Grenfell-Hunt (P. Oxy. 1451, 
1452. See the references to previous literature on the subject cited 
by them). ‘The favored classes were veterans, Roman citizens with 
their freedmen and slaves, Alexandrians, and Graeco-Egyptians. 
The epzcriszs in the case of Romans.was held before the prefect or 
some official delegated by him for the purpose. It was not confined 
to the question of remission of poll-tax, but was a determination of 
the legal status of the individual. From the document which we 
publish here we learn that certain citizens of Oxyrhynchus enjoyed 
a lower rate of poll-tax (twelve drachmae) than that exacted from 
the rest of the citizens (forty drachmae). In this declaration the 
lad is thirteen years old, and he was registered at this age because 
the poll-tax was levied at fourteen. Both parents were citizens of 
Oxyrhynchus, and the father and maternal grandfather belonged 
to the twelve-drachmae class. In other towns the rate of poll-tax 
for the privileged class varied (Wilcken, Grundziige, 199). From 
P. Oxy. 1452 it seems probable that of é« Tod yupvaciov, or those 
belonging to a gymnasium, formed a larger class, and within this 
group the members who paid twelve drachmae were those who 


seas 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


received a special remission for some reason which cannot at present 
be determined. The epicrisis of this class may be held before the 
strategus, the royal scribe, or others (P. Oxy. 1452,1. 2). Cf. Bell, 
Archiv, 6 (1920), 107 ff. 


167. DE VECTIGALIBUS LOCANDIS 
(ca. 81-96 p. Chr.) 


P. Oxy. 44; Wilcken, Chrestomathte, 275. 


[Ila]vicnos ........dAas otpatnyos “Okvpu[y]y(irov) | 
PAc]xAnmidd[ne Baoidicxa ls ypappa(rel) Tod avtod vopod | 
yaipew. | Ent ris yevouévns Statrpacews THY TEeXWU||KOV VITO 
ToD Te €uovd Kal ood eri TrapovTov Kal| THv eiwOoTwr, SvctreOovv- 
TV TOY TO év|KUKALOV AoxYoNoUpEevaY Kal ((TOd)) TO ayo|pavdouLov 
Snuwociwvav ws tkava Bramto|uévov Kal Kwdvvevorvt@v peT- 
avaoTh||vat, doéav ipetv éypaira Tat Kpatiotas | Hryep~ove trepl 
Tov mpdyuatos. “Avtiypawav|tos obv avTov jot Trepl Tod éd- 
wdovra Tas|7[po |répas pic Owes Kata TO SuvaTor | [ava |eovdicat 
Tovs TeAwvas Umép Tov pun || duyla]das yevérPar tLo]vs mpds 
Bliav] al[yo]|uévous, cal mpotepov ca To avtiypladoly | tis 
émusToAns peTédwxa, tv eldhus, Kal | OTe atrodnmodvTds cov Kal 
TOV Over | un érridedeypevav UTO TOY TeNWVO? || wNde HV AANRV 
Tpocepx|ou évwv av|rots [[7oAXaKes |] roANaKts TpoKnpvxOer- 
adv | 2daBov yerpoypadetas THY Te TO év((KU))|KUKALOV Kal TO 
ypadetov acyoNoupévov......- < 

l. 15. pos B[iav] a[yo]uevous, Wilcken; zpooP[uB]a[lo]uevovs, 
Grenfell-Hunt. 

From Oxyrhynchus. This document furnishes a commentary 
on the edict of Tiberius Julius Alexander. ‘The tax on sales, which 
amounted to ten per cent., and the fee to the agoranomus for his 
services in drawing up contracts, etc. were farmed out to contractors, 
These had suffered such losses that they were likely to abscond 
when they were urged to renew their contract, since no bidders 
had appeared at the last offering. ‘hese contracts were let by the 
strategus and the royal scribe in conjunction. The strategus had 
written to the prefect concerning the present situation, and the 
latter had authorized him to examine the former contracts with a 


[ 515 ] 33-2 


to 


T5 


20 


20 


25 


30 


35 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


view to lightening the conditions in order that those who took the 
contract under compulsion might not be constrained to avoid the 
rigorous terms by voluntary exile (cf. no. 165). 


168. EDICTUM GAI VIBI MAXIMI, PRAEFECTI 
(104 p. Chr.) 


P. Br. Mus. 3, 904, ll. 18-38; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 202. 

T[dios Ovi]Biols Ma€:uos éralpy[os] | Adydarz[ou réyer. | || 
Ths nat oi[kiav arroypadhs élvectaé[ons] | avayxaiov [éotiv 
macw toils Ka H[vteva] | Syrore ait[iav amodnuotow aro 
Tov] | vowav wrpocalyyéAre JoOas érra[ver]|Ociv els ta éav[ trav 
éldéoria, tv[a] || cal rhv cvvynOn [oi |eovouiay ry[s amo ||ypadns 
TANpecwoWw Kal THL Tpoa[HKOU ||ons avTOls yewpylat TpoTKap- 
tepjnowlow |. | Hides pévtol[e ]re éviwy tav [ard] | THs yodpas 
n TOS Huov exet Ype[Lav | || BovAop[ac] wavtal[s 7 Jods ed[A]oryov 
So[codr ||tal[s] eye Tod évOade émipéviy [ail|tiav atroypade- 
o[@lat mapa Bovr...... | Byotas érapywle] e’Ans, dv én 
tol[vtwe]| | éraka, ob Kai tas [b|roypadas of azrod[etl||Eavres 
avayk[aiav alitav tHv tapov[ciay] | Anovralt Kata t]od[T]o 
TO twapayyerp[a] | évros [THs Tpraxddos Tod évleo[T]@Tos 
EBT aL Ere thie onary ce mre élravenOety | we” A[so.....- 
Vas ay Wee eae (reliqua versus omisst sunt.) 

l. 20. [é]veora[ons], Wilcken; [ov]vecrw[ons], Kenyon-Bell. 
1. 34. [d]roypadds, Wilcken; [a]roypadds, Kenyon-Bell. 

From Alexandria. In this edict the prefect orders all those 
absent from the place of their nativity to return for registration since 
the census was about to be taken. Many of these absentees were 
peasants, who had abandoned their farms and had gone to join the 
urban mob at Alexandria. ‘They are ordered to return to their 
farms. An exception is made for a few whose services were needed 
in the city and these are permitted to register with Festus. Cf. 
no. 193; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 205 ff.; Wilcken, Grund- 
ziige, 26 ff, 65. Other documents which deal with this subject 
are P. Gen. 16; P. Fay. 243 nos. 174, 193,194. Cf. Luke, 2, 3, fora 
similar law in Judaea at the time of the birth of Christ. This docu- 
ment is not only important for its bearing on the doctrine of origo 


[ 516 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


(‘ééa), but also furnishes our earliest evidence for the urban move- 
ment in Egypt under Roman rule. 


169. DE SUMPTIBUS yuyvacvapyias MINUENDIS 
(114-117 p. Chr.) 


P. Amh, 2. 70, col. 1; Wiicken, Chrestomathie, 149. 
Col. 1, Fragment A 


PyrvKe KrXavdios Ovivdsxe tds Kpatioras ér[iotp(atnyar) | 
mapa apyovtwv | “Epyod oA(ews). Tod xpatiotov rryenovos 
“PoutiA[iouv Aolvm(ov) ceXevoavtos | cveTadnvat Ta TOAKG TOV 
avaropatav thls yuluvaciapylas, [a of] | caOcor[la|vapevos 
mpoOuporepov vropéelvao lt TO avddwpa, || Kal cod Snpociat 
> t A do , Woe? / Wn" 
émitpéavtos tov a[vara lualr los, a évedélyerto, [o luoradjvac 


Kal TaUTa EKOV..t....... s Tovs vov | yupvactapyelv pé[r]- 
OUT CHUTT IE's) ofa sit akan 50) Anupa Kal t[LO] | Badavetov Kal To 
cvyvnPe[s] dudou[e|v[o]v t[r]lep tw...va.[a]|7o Tod yupvaciov © 
els TO Onplo|ovo(v) yOua T..... a5. .ov.. || Avyvarpias, aorrep 
0 Kata Tolv|s yupvact....p...€Kav..... | kata TO KayjKov 
avotan[jvat] ta m[Ae]i@ Tav bd Tov .. | EXaooovos yivopévou 
LUT rane: TaTos av..we.| éTépas ypelas edidou aro. ..... 
see av eal ape LO oe AU OLY Natials the OT ite meOUGI ae meat 
Fragment B 


] Spaypat) E av? (dv) (kavai ciow [... 
Jrous (Spaxpal) TE, wovo[icav?... 
].noae os érrupernt( ).al... 
Jwpats. vewxop.tas ovd.[... 
] (Spaypal) T...ANs aArA(__) A€yomeLy || 
] txavai (Spaxpat) +. [No ]um(al) (Spayuat) [... 
] Aosrr(al) (Spaxypat) cf, cat bro Tov.[... 
] (paypal) °A, artive...cv gil... 
| vireo ToD €..... Tou|.. 

From Hermopolis. ‘The gymnasiarch was a member of the 
college of archons in the metropolis. Evidently the cost of the 
office had become so great that it was difficult to fill it. Accordingly 
Rutilius issued an edict defining the amounts which should be 


Tyee a 


T5 


20 


15 


20 


30 


se) 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


spent in the various duties connected with the position. Unfor- 
tunately the papyrus is so badly mutilated that it is only possible to 
decipher references to the baths and to torch-lighting. At this 
period the office was probably held for one year and was shared by 
two or more who took the duties alternately (Oertel, Die Liturgie, 
316 ff). In the third century the office was held for a longer 
period, but each member of the college served only for short periods 
of a few days at a time (P. Oxy. 1413, 1418; Wilcken, Chresto- 


mathie, 39. Cf. Oertel, Joc. cit.; Preisigke, St. Beamtenw. 53 ff-; 


Jouguet, Vie munic. 166, 292 ff., 318 ff, 399 ff). 


170. EPISTULAE PETRONI MAMERTINI ET STATILI MAXIMI 
DE IMMUNITATE CIVIUM ANTINOOPOLITANORUM 
(135, 156 p. Chr.) 

Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 26. 

I 

Iletpdvios Mapeptetvos “Opeiwm otpatnyat OeweiTou yai- 
pew. | “Avtiypadoly émr|ictoAns ypadetons [uloe vo Anun- 
TALOUPA Deh istete Tov is | tyv Avtifvoo]u KexrAnpopévor [ex This 
II[ro]\euaéw[v] morews Tov|tos Tois yplaw|uacw vréraka 
Bovropevos ce dpovtic[at, dlrs oft] te adlrod Kai of tov 
adrov tov ts tHv Avtivoov atrackio[pé|vov alvd |Bptc||rot cal 
aver[npléacro. Staywouw év tas vouwt. (“Erous) 16 Oe0d 
[SA ]8pcavod Dappod|Oc 10. 

: II 

Lrateihios MaEcpos “Opeiwv orpatnyar Oewveirou yaiperv. | 
"Evtuxe BcBrccdiws S00évte wou trapa Kacropos "Adpodiciou, bt 
éy|lyeypam[t las kat éruoToAn TOD KpatiaTns uynuns Mapepretvou, 
dc’ Hs | ovx Strws Tovs "Avtivodas, GANA Kal Tods avTav HOE- 
Anoev [av |uBpio|rous eiv[as, x lat to Os, e[¢ To ]codTov Krol 7 ef ov (?) 
mplaéas, Sntecavtd pe Tht Kpaltiotw Hyewov. (“Etous 16 
Geot Athiou ’Avtwvivov Mecop? | érayopévev a. (2nd H.) 
Leumpovios ém(dé)dxa. || (3rd H.) Ei teva Sixara eyes, THe 
oTpaTnyat tapadod | kat ta Séovta moinoet. (4th H.) "Aodos. 

On the founding of Antinoopolis, cf. Jouguet, Ve munic. 115 ff. 
From this document we learn that citizens of Ptolemais were 
drafted by Hadrian for the settlement of Antinoopolis, and that the 


[ 518 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


selection was made by lot. As compensation for this compulsory 
change of residence, not only the Antinoopolitans, but their parents, 
were exempt from liturgies which might be imposed upon them 
outside of their place of residence. Both letters imply that there 
was a disposition on the part of local officials to forget the grant 
made by Hadrian, probably because the pressure to secure available 
candidates for liturgies was already becoming severe. It is also 
evident that Ptolemais, although a Greek city, did not enjoy the 
favored position in Egypt which Alexandria had, nor is there any 
evidence that the administration of Ptolemais differed in any way 
from that of the ordinary Egyptian metropolis (Wilcken, Grund- 
xiige, 48). At any rate its citizens were subject to the strategus of 
the nome in the matter of liturgies, as this document clearly indi- 


cates. Cf. no. 184. 


171. DE VECTIGALIBUS EXIGENDIS 
A SENIORIBUS VICI 
(136 p. Chr.) 


P. Br. Mus. 2, 255; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 2.72. 


Yoxpnvis Loxunvews ral “Ariov | “Hpaxreidov [xat] “Atpis 
TleOéws cai Azror|A@vi0s Atodwpov cat Hacokss “Hparos | xat 
‘Opiov ‘Opiwvos cai Urorrtwv || Xarpjwovos cal” Hpwv Kar- 
ov | kat “Hpwv “Hpaxreidouv cal Lapamads | MicOov kai of 
Noumr(ol) mper(BvTepot) Komns | Kap(avidos) rod x’ (érous) 
‘Adptavod Kaicapos | tod Kupiov ‘Opiwv ‘Opiwvos ya(ipecr). || 
"Emi cuvectaxapév cor av? vuelv] | mpaxropevuy Kal yupitiv 
thv de | Surnpav kal dopov mpoB8atwv kal ar|Awv ciddy Tis 
avThs Kouns, | émpaxtopevaas Kal éyiptoas péll[ x Joe dws Daddu 
pnvos tod Ka (€Tous) | Kal avtod tod Daddy, [Tas pev Ths | 
turnpas éml tyv Snuociav tpate|Cav, tas Sé Tod hopov TaY 
mpoBa|twv eis [t])v eal tovTos Tparrefalv], || Kai ovdév [a Jou 
éveanotpev trept | rovtwv. Laccokis ‘Hparos dia tod | warp[ os] 
‘Hp[a]s ovdev éxar@ xados m[pox(erras) |]. | “Aa[or]ALo ]y[ cJos 
Avodeépou ovde[y] | év[x]ar[@]. Amiwv ‘Hpaxretdou || odd[év] 
évKar@ xabeas mpo|[x« jecrar. 


l. 10. “Eri="Evel; tudv=npav. 1. 11. de=re. 


[ 519 ] 


25 


Io 


15 


20 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


From the Faytim. This document shows us that the elders of 
the village were required to collect certain taxes. In this case they 
have contracted with Horion to gather the tax on beer and the 
sheep-tax. At the end of his term he is given a formal release as 
prescribed by law. It is probable that the three men who give the 
release were those to whom the liturgy was assigned by the whole 
body of elders (Oertel, Die Liturgie, 146 ff; Jouguet, Vie munic. 
217 ff.). The assignment of the duties of a liturgy is frequently 
recorded in Egypt (Wenger, Dze Stellvertretung im Rechte der 
Papyri, 75 ff.3 cf. Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 263, 264), but in certain 
cases it seems to have been forbidden, cf. P. Fror. 382: p. 101. 


172. DE CIVIBUS AD MUNERA SUBEUNDA NOMINATIS 
(Ca. 37) Dahon.) 


BGU. 235; Wilcken, Chrestomathte, 399. 
[Ov]eyérws otp(atnyor) [Ap ]ou(voirov) ‘Hp[axr(etdov) pepé- 


Sos] | wap[a] I[e]Oéws [km |woy[p(auuatéws)..... Kal addowv | | 
copov.|’ Arf ri] Adpodd érrix[ adovpévov..... ll|evl ye lore wAn- 


poovtos eis Dapyevod «0 | cai Uf alo[i]wr[os] "Adpodsctou émi- 
«(arovpévov) Kévuis | cat S[a]Bivov ‘Aprdrovu 71a ]v B | &vytora 
mAnpovvtwy eis Iadr[e..] | cat “loyupiwvos Iletec[ovyou cal 
....]|| coup[élos rere (eutnxorar) tov [B.. ]a+ ax[o]| edu(ns) 
IIroreuaidos Nélas avadisa |us tov[s] | vroyeyp(aupévous) dvtas 
eUTropous Kal émrtdnoto[ us] | yvoOune cal xwwdU[v]ov Tov amo Tis | 
Kons TOV Kal évyvope volus Kata TO ef Bos] || rEeumOncopuévous 
ToL KpalT(icT@r) ériotp(aTnyar) els KA(Hpov)]. | Eiol &é- | 


Laparaupov TeBovrovu éy[ wv mopov...... ] | Upovends Upo- 
Tenaou|, ] | Eicyvpas TeO[élos. .[ Vhs tates 
he Pee OVO] S24. siesse al Lines 

l. 13. lege xwdvvor. l. 14. lege éyyvopévwv. 


From the Fayim. This document reveals the method of appoint- 
ment to liturgies in the villages at this period. Candidates were 
chosen by the elders, who were legally bound as sureties for their 
nominees. ‘The list was drawn up by the village-scribe, who for- 
warded it to the strategus. From the latter official the names were 
forwarded to the epistrategus, who chose the candidates for the 


[ 520 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


various offices by lot. It may be noted that Petheus serves as secre- 
tary for several villages. For the capital required for various 
liturgies, cf. Oertel, Die Liturgie; Wilcken, Gr. Ostraka, 1, 507 ff.; 
P. Giess. 58. In some cases we find the liturgists appointed by the 
prefect (P. Amh. 64; P. Br. Mus. 1220). 


173. DE STATU CIVIUM ROMANORUM 
ET ALEXANDRINORUM 
(139 p. Chr.) 


BGU. 747; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 35. 


COner 

‘Avidios “Arf 10d Jopar tae xpatiotas jryepwov(c) | Iroreuatos 
Lo]r[p]arnyos Korz[et]rov yaipeuv. | Tov cupiaxov tpaypaton, 
nyeHov péytate, | émrifnrovvtwy éEaipetov ppovrida Kal cuvelly 
émripér[tjav cal dedouévwr eis tod[t]o ov plo]vov | a€toypéw[v], 
ada Kal aTiOnviov wariota av|Ppwrerv, [ov] duédsrrov, Kupte, 
tots €v Tais dnuoctars | ypelats Told vlopwod ovat ‘Pwpators Kat 
"Are Ea |vdpevor | xalt] wadla]e otpatidtais avtictatodar Tots 
mpay| lacey || rapawav reiOe[ oO lar tots KeXevopévors, Kal ot|o- 
[wlevos pelt avon crv jpetv eriyol[yv] cor Tat Ku|piwor dnrOcat. 
"Ex é]ule]vov 8€ [a]itdv xara 76 [a]vay|Kaiov éruyopevos bd 
THs xpelas avadép[e]oOa. | Tdv yap tpayudtov 76 péyilo |rov 


éotw Kat yvnl|lo[e|drepov [w]oAAns Te mpoe[O |pias Seopévwr | [ai 


a|raity[ ce lis THv OhtAopE|v lov Tt Kuptaxde| ALO }ywe. Av O[ 7 Jep 
érralylpuva® mpood[e|pouevos | tHe éexmpaker xal [v]ro yépa 
Kat mp[o]s rolv ..].c]...-- top[o]v ca[lta] pnva petal jeutro- 
pLev Jos || [rods rpaxtopas o[tlaxpeive m[p jos rov e[é ole lov[r]|a 
brép [T]hs idi[a]s mpaxtwpi[a]s Aoyo[v] afi|t]lovule]va m[r]n- 


[plodbopet]v err. «....uT...05 | [d]petrdw Tol..... €lE avralv. 
"Err |eyope. [a ]ploltpém..... Ue twa 
Col. 


- / 
ddrov ypelar Snpocias evyipiabévtes | He bTaKovoey dpirovow 
fa) \ \ or 
xapol | amattobvts TwiDectar yarpnodpevor | éavTold]s yr elvas 
a , 
vmod tHv otpatnytay || undé[7]o Kata TO ica Tots évywptots 
/ ] } ~/ t xX > 9 > \ 5 
mpaxtwpaw odetrewy totacbar Kav | érrityntos (?) avtol elvat 
Néyovtes | TO Goov OTL avTois Tas éextpdkers év|rrodi{Gover, 
>) lal \ \ lal ’ J @ \ Aor é rap S 
éviayod dé Kal ToAu@dow || avtictacOat Kai KaBoXov boot eicly | 


pb. SQ 


5 


20 


Io 


15 


20 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


Lal > “ / , ? / > A 
TotovTot év Tals AuTovpyiais péxps av|Oadias ér[s]yecpodow 
hOdvew ws | cali t]ots amd tod vopwod vrodiypa THs | atrecOlas 
Soke tly birotiPetar. ‘Eri ody || ovTws Ta Kupltaka Tpaypata 
évtro|diterar, Séopas, KUpLe, OVX OrLywV | éx TOUTOU KiVdUVEvO- 

f ae / & a \ sea Vie an {} 
pévov, éav | cot d0&nu, SvaraPetiv wept avtav Kal 0 av | doxima- 
[one|s orHoal, TOL TPOT@L Tpoa||épyer Oat avToi|s] déov éoTiv Els 

\ / \ ) / a / b] / 

To pyre | t[)]v araitnow Tov dnnocior éu|[708 |i[ Cleo Oar 7. . 
vakuptax[ am jpayplata.|...Klatpdcav....exfa]e...t.]..... 
Verso 

a b \ / / / \ x 

Tév is tas dnwoctas xpeias Katictavopéver | Kat un Bovro- 
“évOUS Omoiws Tois adXroLS TpalypaTiKois UTaKkovery StvacaL 
Tapactnoas | THs KpaTioTaL émicTpaTHywl, Os émlalvayKace || 

’ \ \ / > na 2? a v D a iN 
avTovs Ta MpoonkovTa avTois éxterelv. | ("ETous) B Pappodh 6. 


From Coptus. The Alexandrians were exempt from ywpuxat 
NevToupylat (no. 165). It is evident that Romans resident in 
Egypt were also freed from similar liturgies, and their privileged 
position led these two classes to claim exemption from the imperial 
liturgies as well. Apparently Ptolemaeus was unable to compel them 
to undertake the duty of collecting the taxes due to the imperial 
fiscus, and their disobedience was demoralizing to the discipline of 
the nome. The prefect instructed the strategus to send the names 
of those nominated to liturgies to the epistrategus, who will compel 
them to discharge their duties. The only evidence for a Roman 
citizen discharging a liturgy in Egypt is found in BGU. 1062. In 
this case, however, he takes over the collection of a tax as a business 
contract from the holder of the liturgy. In P. Fror. 57 an Alexan- 
drian owning property in Hermopolis claims immunity on the 
ground of his age and not on the basis of his Alexandrian origin. 
His petition is dated in 223-225, or later than the edict of Cara- 
calla, and it is probable that the grant of Roman citizenship may 
have done away with the favored position which the Alexandrians 
held. The citizens of Antinoopolis, however, retained their privi- 
leges until later (Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 397 (A.D. 254). Cf. 
Wilcken, Grundziige, 345 f.). 


[ 522 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


174. DE IMMUNITATE MEDICORUM 
(140 p. Chr.) 


P. Fay. 106; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 395. 


Vinh ieee, vropyn ||ula]reouloly Zerx[ tywiov Mapxwvos 
émt||otpatnyou Kexporvle|ouévov [ets .. (€ros)] | “Avtwvir[o]v 
Tov Kuptov Dappot] Oz. . |, || “HAwodwpos etrev: Kéxpixelv.... | | 
atrodvaas. | 

Taiw. “Aovidias “Hrrodepa: ¢[rapy(ws) Aiy(Uarov)] | rapa 
Madp(xov) Ovarep[ié lov Tewérrov [iatpod]. | Tapa ta azrnyo- 
pevpéva ayO[els eis ére]|ltnpnow yelv]nua[tloypadoup[évor] | 
vTapxovT_av meélpt kopals Baxrx(iada)] | cat ‘Hdarotiada ris 
“Hpaxa[etdov] | wepidos tod ’Apouvolrou tletpae]|tet 75n ypovear 
év THe Xpletac] || rovovpevos éEnaOévnca [6rws(?)], | Kvpre, dOev 
a&i® cal Tov colthpal | édXehoai pe Kal Keredoas 7[dy pe] | 
atronvOnvat THS xpelas, drr[ws du]|vnOd éwavTov avaxtncalcbar 
allo TOv Kapatav, ovdéev S[é Sez.(?).] | Tov Kab ouotmp[ara] 
broraéa[t, ort] | TéXeov arrodvovtas Tév [NevToup]|yrav of THY 
iatpixny émiotn| unv] | wetaxerptfopuevor, war[elora [dé of Se]ll- 
Soxipacpmévot WaTrep Kaylo, iv] | & evepyernuévos. Acevtd[ yer]. 


From the Fayim. The petition of the physician Gemellus is 
directed to the prefect. Wilcken infers that the edict of Antoninus 
conferring immunity on a certain number of physicians in each 
town had not yet been promulgated (Dig. 27. 1. 6, 2; Wilcken, 
Chrestomathie, 395), but Gemellus points out that he had been 
assigned to the liturgy contrary to law (rapa ta amnyopevpéva), 
and in ll. 29 ff. he adds that there is no need for him to submit 
copies of the law(?) that physicians, if registered (Sedoxtpacpévot), 
are absolutely exempt from liturgies (cf. P. Oxy. 40; Oertel, Die 
Liturgie, 391). It may be noted that the liturgy of guardian of the 
confiscated lands was held by Gemellus for four years instead of 
one, which was apparently the period of tenure of liturgies in other 
parts of the empire, and that the liturgy had cost him the loss of 
his personal fortune (¢€no@évnoa). For a general sketch of the 
classes which enjoyed immunity, cf. Jouguet, Ve munic. 98 ff. 


[ 523 ] 


On 


Io 


T5 


2 


° 


n 


Io 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


175. EDICTUM M. SEMPRONI LIBERALIS, 
PRAEFECTI AEGYPTI 
(154 p. Chr.) 
BGU. 372; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 19. 
Col. 1 

[Ma@]pxos [Seumpavios] AvBep[aXe]s errap[yos] | Adyuar[rou 
Neyer. | LlurvOavop[at tas] dia tHv yevouévnv dva|yvéperav 
[r]o[v] ..... [tiv] otxelav ar[onre]Aoutrévat adrally.ec(?) Ta 
TPOT| ss vie 6 |rropifovras, érépous Sé AtToup|[yela]s Tevas é[Kdv- 
yovtas] dia tHv [T]oTe wept av|tovs acbéveray év adrodarhe Ere 
kal vov Statpei|Bew hoBw. tév yevouévov tapavtixa mpol- 
yela]ldav. Lporpé[aropas] ody mavtas érav[erO]eiv || emi ra 
loca Kat Toly pev mlp@rov Kal péycot[ov] | x[La]pmov ths eve- 
t[nplas Klal THs ToD Kupiov nueov | A[VTo]Kparopos Tept TavTas 
avOpa@trous Kn[de]|wovias amrodépecOas [kal] un avectiovs Kal 
do[t]|«[ov]s ei Eévns adda Gale. “I]va Sé robro podup[ or jel|po[v] 
kali] ndcolv wlolunloolow, t]otwoav [wlév tLo]v w...4 | 7... &x 
taut[ns] THs ait[ias é]te catexopevor alic]|OjcecOas tH[s] Tod 
pleyio]rov Avtoxpatopos ev[ple|v[et]as «at ypnlo]rorntos, 
é[re|tperovons Kal plnde|uiav mpos alv]tovs Syrnow éoec Oa, 


arra pnd[e] || pds tods ad[Ao]us Tods e[E] Hs SHarore aitias 
tro | tév otpatnlyov] mpoypadévtas: Kat tovtouvs yap | 
RILEY A katépy[ecBar] eis tlovs To]mous ... reliqui versus, 


maxime mutilt, omisst sunt. 
Col. 11 

...ouT@... O€ éxd[v]tas am[o]dpaou tovn|p[ov xJa[t] Anco[T]pe- 
xov Biov [é]rou[Eé]voes pwetyvuc|O[ac]. “Iva 8é ur) wovov tol vr Joss, 
andra [«]at éré[plors | radra pe wapawwely Kal rpaccew wabwor, || 
iotwoay, t[v] x[a]i tots Kpatioroi[s] éruotpatyyots | Kal Tots 
a[tlparnyots Kai rots me[u]pOeior vr’ éeulod] | wrpos thy THs 
Yopas doparciayv kai apepiuviav | orpatidtats TapHyyer[T ass 
Tas wev apyouevas | épodous x[w]Avew, Tpoopdvtas Kal mpo- 
arav||tévtas, Tas [6€ ylevopévas traplalutixa éridie|Kew xalt] 
tolvs] AnupGévtas er’ avt[o]d[wp]oe Kxalxovpyous pln]Sév 
Tepattépwm Ta év avTHe THe | AntoTelat yevo[u]évov éFeralev, 
ddnrots 5 THY To|Te Tpoypad[élvT@V ovydlover Kal év THe 
oil|cetar THe yew[py tat mpocKxaptepodar pi évoyreiv. | Katepyé- 


[ $24. ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


[c]Owoav ody aplélpypvos cat goto | w[po]Oeopia [avrolis, é& 

ob ay TodT[o] pov To didtaly[ula év Exdlot]wr vowads tpoteOne, 

phves y.| ELaly dé tes [we]7a tv Tocavtny mov dirar|l6[p ]orriav 

[é]ml Eévns wravepevos havi, | ovtos ovKé[te] ws UoTTos, 

GANA WS oMoroyos | KaKkodpyos o[v]vAnuPOels mpds pe ava- 

meu|d[Onoe|rac. | ("Erovs) [t]n "Avtwvivov tod xupiov. || Ow8 a. 
1. 16. Kaprepyé[o]$woar, in original copy. 


From the Fayim. This edict was issued after the revolt of the 
Egyptians in A.D. 153-154 had been crushed (Meyer, Kilo, 7 
(1907), 124 f.). Some had left their homes because of the political 
upheaval, others had been driven forth because of the severity of 
the liturgies. The latter had been proscribed (srpoypadévtor), 
since they were liable to imprisonment (cf. no. 194). The document 
reveals the oppressiveness of the liturgies at this early period, since 
property-holders were abandoning their property and living in exile 
rather than face the burdens imposed upon them, cf. Rostowzew, 


Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 206 ff. 


176. DE IMMUNITATE PATRIBUS ANTINOO- 
POLITANORUM CONCESSA 


(159 p. Chr.) 


Compt. rend. de Pacad. d. inscr. et bell. lett. 1905, 160 ff; 
Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 28. 


"Avtiypa(pov) émurtoA(js) émiatpa(tnyov) OnBaisos. | Aidt0s 
Pavoteivos ctpa(tnyét) Aveor(oritov) | yaipe. | BuBridvov 
"AmoArAodavous ‘Opi((w))||avos onpiwoapevos teud|OAvai cor 
éxérevoa. “Emel | ody dynow matépa éavtov | dvta Taidwy 
"Avtwoirtxar | ka[t old ra [é]aixepadwa Tedodr||Ta KkexAnpoobat 
Kat ayvowlay tro Fewoxpatovs eis mpalxtopetav Ka[t laxpipd- 
[rw ]v | Kat vdv éridnunocarta...| mpds beépAwow Snpoctally 
kateaxjoO[ar..]toe...| xpelar. Dpdvticov, ei tadra [ob]|tws 
” aren f YIP NS “4 fi fa) c/ 
éxyer, Kal’ & rapéer[o] | ép’ omotwy KexpicOa, 7[0d] | érepa 
’ , 2 b] > A > \ / / > A / 
ovopwata avtT avrTov || ets THY ypéav Tréurva. | EppdcO(ai ce) 
evxo(uar). | (“Erous) «8 ’Avtwveivov Kaicapos | t[od] xuptov 


Ilayer 6. 
(525, )] 


mn 


La | 


Loa! 


N 


10) 


, 


oO 


Nn 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


This document shows that parents of the settlers in Antinoopolis 
were exempt from the poll-tax and from liturgies which might be 
imposed on them in villages where they held property outside the 
limits of their native place (cf. nos. 170, 183). 


177. DE IMMUNITATE VETERANORUM 
(172 p. Chr.) 


BGU. 180; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 396. 

mapa [Laliov ‘I[ov]A[tov ’AzoA]iva[pio]u ovfe]|tpavod ye[o]v- 
x[o]i[vros év] eeune Ka[pa]|vidc. [A]iatérax[ras, «]dpce, tod(s) 
oveTpal|vovs éyew peta t[nv amolAvow mevt[alllern ypo[vov 
avat[avoe|ws. Lapa 8) rav|rnv thy [SeJat[lal&w e[yo] éan- 
peaoOny | ule]ta Scetiav THs [amo]Avcews Kall] | alv]edoOnv 
kat émrn[ptalv eis NetToupyiay | Kal wéype TOD Sedpo [x]aTa TO 
és || év Necroupytas eiu[t] ddcareil wr las. | Tod rovovrov rav7[t] 
amnyopeu|uévou [€]ai trav év[y]wpiwy morAdt | mA€lov em” éuod 
cuvTnpetc Oat | dheirs Tod banpeTHcavtos Tov || Tocod[ Tov THs 
atpatetas xpovov. | Avorrep mpoadevryewy cor nvayKna|Onv dixatav 
dé[no]ev trocovpevos | Kai a&ta cuvtnphoal poe Tov THs | ava- 
TavacEews toov xpovey Kata (Ta) || Tept TovTou dvateTaypméva, iva 
duvndo@ | Kaayo t[|v err poe devay Tov idtav | motetcOat, a[y]- 
Op[ |rros mpeoBulrn]s kat | wovos tuyx[avlov, [klab tie toyne 
cou | eis del evyapsoro. Acevtvyet. || (2nd H.) Taios “IovAcos 
"Arrorsvaptos émrvdédax|xa. | (3rd H.) (Erous) iB" Meyelp «@. | 
(4th H.) Tou o[tpatn]y[ee] évtvy[e] nal ra a | mploonkolvra 
mounoes. || (5th H.) ’A[zddos]. 


From the Fayim. An edict of Octavian (Wilcken, Chresto- 
mathie, 462) and of Domitian (zbzd. 463) granted immunity to 
veterans apparently without restrictions. From the petition of 
Apolinarius we learn that veterans in Egypt at this period only 
enjoyed immunity for five years after their discharge. In his case, 
he had been beguiled into taking a liturgy two years after his release 
from the army and he had held it continuously without any vacatzo 
such as the natives had (Cod. F. 10. 41. 13 P. Guess. 59, where 
vacationes of three and seven years are recorded). ‘There is no 


[ 526 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


other evidence in any part of the empire for limitation of the period 
of immunity to five years. By an edict of Severus veterans were 
forever freed from all liturgies except those imposed upon their 
patrimony (Dig. 50. 5. 7). It is probable that Apolinarius, being 
a property-holder, enjoyed immunity from munera patrimoniorum 
for a period of five years. Under Severus this privilege was with- 


drawn (cf. pp. 106 f.). 


178. DE MUNERIBUS SACERDOTUM 
(77 po Chr.) 

BGU. 194; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 84. 

Pralvei[w]e “AworA[A]@vios | “Apowvoeitov “Hpax(rctdov) 
wepioos | wapa ‘Hpd xapoypa(upatéws) Netrouv moreas. | Avi 
"Orrews *Evotvrrews xr[p]oO(évtos) || ex THs TOV evoxnpover 
ypadis | els mpaxtopiay apyupixay THs Kduns | yvwobérvTos poe 
eivat lepéws Tov dvTos | év THi Kaunt lepod Kal TOv NecTovpyLa@[r] | 
abeGévtwv, Kaba nkiwoay of ao THS Ke||uns avadeEdpevor éx 
cuveatabécews tas | NevToupyetas émuBadrovcas avTois éxTe- 
Aéoewy, a[Klorovdws | THs TapaxoutoO[élvTe cor BiBrALdios p[ov] 
érl wro|ypadns Tov Kpatiatou émictpa(THyou), we éviepset|- 
AnemTar avtiyp(ada) émictorAay Svo, pevds pev || Seovrios 
"AckAnTiadotas, THY Oé étTépay cod, | KaP ds avi Erépov lepéws 
atrodvbévro(s) | &repou eis KAHpov mewPOévTos exAn|pdOncar, 
Kal TOD éx cuvKaTabécews THY | aro [T]As KwOuNS yevouévou emi 
Ilotdpevos || otpatnyjoavtos vrouvnpaticpov didmpes | Tovs 
itroyeyp(aupevous) dvTos evmropous Kal éri|tndelous treupOn- 
couévous eis KAHpov Tat | Kpatiotas éerioTp(aTnyws). Hil dé: 
Lapatiwv Kar...v A, | Arooxopos NetA(ov) émtxand(oupévov) 


A 
O[....] A> |] (Erous) tn’ 0 ’“A@vp al . 
1. 17. weupbevros=reupbertes. l. 21. dvros=6vras. 


From the Fayim. Rostowzew (G.G.4. 1909, 639 ff.) has 
pointed out that, under the Roman administration, the privileges 
of the priestly hierarchy were steadily reduced. From this docu- 
ment we learn that the priests were subject to certain liturgies, but 
they had made a private agreement with the village-officials of 
Neilopolis whereby the latter had consented to release them from 


[S270 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


Io 


20 


30 


35 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


certain burdens. The terms of the agreement are not stated, but 
we must assume that the priests had secured it by offering some form 
of compensation. Opeus had been included in the annual list of 
citizens submitted for the collection of tribute, and when the 
appointment had been made by the usual method his name had 
been drawn for the office. The matter was brought to the attention 
of the village-scribe, who wrote this letter to the strategus, notifying 
him of the error and submitting the names of two other men having 
an annual income of a thousand drachmae, one of whom was to 
be chosen by lot for the post vacated by Opeus. On the liturgy 
Tpaxtopia apyupixer, cf. Oertel, Die Liturgie, 195 ff, and for 
the immunity of priests, cf. zbid. 392, n. 3; Otto, Priester und 
Tempel, 2, 250 ff. 


179. DE IMMUNITATE MULIERUM 
(ca. 180 p. Chr.) 


P. Teb. 327; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 394. 

[Ov]etriw: Tov[pSov]e tas | xpatiotras [é]riotpat[ynyar] | 
mapa Kpovodto[s] Zwid[ov] | t[o]é Herecotyou amd cons || 
[Te]8tivews Horéuwvos | we[pidos] tod “Ap[o]uvoeitov. | "Ere 
Tddat, KUpLE, TOD Tpoyeypam|uévou you TaTpos avado|OévTos eis 
emiTnpnow yell[v]nuatoypadou|ué]vev | [v]rapyovtwy cat peta 
tov | [@]piouévoy ypdvov ths | [é]aetnpnoews TeTeXevTy|KOTOS 
am[opouv] unde év xal\raXeit[ovto]s éte atro Tod | Tprcxardexatou 
Erous | Geod Avpnriov “Avtaviv[ou] | avty ExtoTe ov SeovTas | 
atvrattoduale] ta brép Tay || Urapyov[T@]v TeXovpeva | Snuocca. 
[Ke]xerevopevou | ody, xvpre, y[u]vatxas adet|oP@ar tay [010 |v- 
tov xpecov | avayxaiels] [yluv% otca a8on||Ontos mo[AXo lis 
éreot BeBalonuévy [xat] cuvduvedouca | dca todt[ 0 Kat jaXelreu 
tv | [é]diav [eri cé] catadevyw | [a€voidca ce x jenedoas Sn || 
[Ta €v ovowjate Tod matpos|......... OjvaceisTnv|.......-. y 
cai emt Gov |[7........ Jous ypovou ov|........ sevou Tots ev || 
ait) TL ape e. Atevtiyes. | (2nd H.) (“Erous) [.... M]ecopy) «. | 
Mnédevos [érre]yowévou | tau orpat[ny]ar évtvye. | (3rd H.) 
“Amrddos. 

From the Fayim. The father of the petitioner had been appointed 
to the post of superintendent of confiscated property, and in the 


[ 528 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


discharge of this liturgy his fortune had been seriously impaired. 
His daughter Cronous, as his heiress, complained to the epistrategus 
that continual demands had been made upon her since her father’s 
death for moneys to be paid in connection with this liturgy. It is 
not clear whether she was actually holding the liturgy, or whether 
these sums were exacted from her estate as obligations which her 
father had not fulfilled before his death. For the liability of heirs, 
cf. Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 278, where the estate of a decaprotus 
is certainly liable for the obligations of the holder of the liturgy 
(cf. Oertel, Die Liturgie, 374, n. 4). It is probable that Cronous 
was purposely obscuring the issue in her petition, and that she was 
not actually discharging the liturgy, since she claimed that there was 
an edict which forbade the assignment of such liturgies to women. 
Women, however, were not exempt from munera patrimoniorum 


(Goda Frito. 4279} :10..64.1): 


180. DE FUGA EORUM QUI MUNERIBUS OBNOXII SUNT 
(186 p. Chr.) 


P. Geneva, 37; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 4.00. 

"Arrod\roTa otpa(tnyot) “Apat(voitov) “Hpax(reidov) | pepi- 
dos | rapa Swrnpivov Ywrtov Kal Trav | Nour(Ov) mpecB(vtépav) 
dcadexo(uévov) Kal Ta Kata THY || K@poypa(upaTetav) Ko(~wNS) 5 
Loxvor(aiov) Nycov. | ’Avti Tptidevos Leumpwviov | [x]at 
Tlaovftis Uexatos cat Ivedepato(s) | Sdrov Kal ‘Aprrancews 
‘Apraydou | [r]av 8 €[v] A[j]owe mpax(ropias) apyups(kdy) || 
[T]hs mpoxes(uévns) Ka(uns) wn patvopévwr | didouev Tovs brro- 10 
yeypa(umévous) dvTas evird|pous Kat émuTndetous, TeupOnaope- 
vous | eis KAHpov TAL KpatloTas emiotpa(THywL). | 

Eiot dé: || 

Sdrvpos “AckAntidbov éxa(v) two(pov) (Spaypov) 15 

YSdtas Vdrtov émixar(ovpevos) ActapE o(uoiws dpaypyov) w 

IlaBods laBodros opoiws (Spayxuav) vv 

Lrotrontis YwTov rAakos o(wolws Spaypav) 

(and H.) Swrnpuyos (érav) v’ oddA(7)) weT@7(w2) || 
é& aptot(epov) 20 
(ist H.) (“Erovs) es’ Mdpxov Avpndtov Koupodov 
’Avtwvivov Kaicapos tod Kup(tov). ‘Ezreid xs’. 


AMA [ 529. ] 34 


32 


35 


40 


‘DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


From the Fayim. This document reveals the great distress 
caused by the imposition of liturgies. Four men, chosen by lot 
for the collection of taxes in the village of Socnopaei Nesus, had fled 
to escape the liturgy. The village-elders submitted the names of 
four others to be sent to the epistrategus. It may be noted that no 
choice by lot is possible, and it is probable that the elders were 
unable to submit enough names to permit a choice (cf. pp. 112 ff; 
Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 206 ff.; nos. 189, 194). 


181. DE NOMINATIONE MAGISTRATUUM 
(192 p. Chr.) 

P. Ryl. 77, Ml. 32-52. 

Kal avtiy[padov viro|uvnpwatos: wel..... 6 |woota Tpos TOL 
Bl npate] wapovtwy tally évap|ywv Aiov yup[vlactapyov Avo- 
vuotou|[To]d cal... vOeou éEnyntov, Orvp[ m0 |Sépou rpodixou, 
“AmoA[A@v]i[o]u ‘HpaxrXarodAdwr[os yu]uvacrapy(joavtos) Kat 
"Ayirl[rAéws] Kopynrdiov, tév mlaplectotwy amo Tis Toews 
éripwvy|[aolavtav: ctepécOw 'Ayirrevs Koopnteiav* uLod TOV 
ma[tlépa tov diroripov Tov [ylépovta Para. “Ayirre[d]s eitrev: 
TELOOMEVOS THL EMAUTOD TAaTpios ETLdéevomat oTEpal|[ vy ]popov éEn- 
ynTelay emi THL ETHOLA Eiodépety pe TadXaVTA bV0 Kal aTaNda- 
ynvae emiTnpnoews ScautaOovupévns ys. OdXuptrodwpos eiz(ev): 1) 
TUN TOD KUpiou Nudv | Ad[to]KpaTtopos apOdvas apyals] Tapéexer 
Kal THS TOA(ews) avEavelt] Ta Tpdypata, Ti T OvK HuEedrev Ertl 
THL eTrappobveitas nyewoviat Aapxiov Méuopos; Ei pév obv o 
"Ayirrevs | BovrAcTas ctehavwlhvar cEnyntetav, eioeveyKaT@ TO 
iontnpsov évreder, et S€ uy, (ovx) TTOV EavTOV EXELpoTOVnG EDV 
eis THY KaTETELyovcaV adpynyv KoounTetlav. “AytAXEds elm(ev): 
éyo avedcEaunv éEnyntetay éml tat Kat étos dvo TaXavTa 
elodépety, ov yap Svvapat Koopntetav. ‘Oduptriddwpos eizr(ev): 
avabeEauevos | tHv pelCova apynv ovK odethes THY éXNaATTOV 
atogpevyetv. “Appoviwy Atooxdpov trotuyav eim(ev)* tacns 
THs everTMONS ETUYE we 0 AYiAXrEvS Kal a’Ta TadTa || aopanré- 
copat bia TOV COV UTOMYNU“ATOD OTL Kal EVTUYYaVw TML NATTPO- 
TATML HYyEwovL Tept THS UBpews. “AytAdAEdVs elm (ev)* oUTE ETUYra 
avtov ote UBpica. | aparriwv o cal “AroAdA@vi0s oTp(aTnyos) 
elm(ev)* & ev elpnKkate yéyparrTat, weTaTrE“POnocovTas 5€é Kal of 


[58074 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


Kocpntal wa ért mapodar avtois avta tadta elmnte. Mer 
orlyov | mpos tHe Kascapeiws Aroyévns nal AvocKopos Kat 
(of) ody avTois Koopntat mpoeNOortes TapovTos TOD Ayidréws 
Sia Tod évds avtav, Acoyévns eitr(ev): éudOopev tov “Axir|réa 
mpoBaromevoy éavTov eis é&ny(nTelav) aTrovTwy uav, TOUTO 
dé ovK é&fv, 0 yap Oevtatos “Avtwvivos Sia (da)Taypatos 
éxédevoev put) Tuyywpicbas dvev Tpid@v émidoy|xwv eis eEny(y- 
Telav)* TOAN@Y OdV éTrLAOyXoV (GvTwV) OpeireEL Els THY KaTETTEL- 
yo[voaly apxnv rapaBaivery, as dvayvdcopat cou TO didtaypa. 
Kat dvayvovtos avtiypa(dov) dvataypatos || Mapxov Avpnriov 
"Avrwvivov Kaicapos, “Aomidas tmatnp “Epua xoopnt[elv- 
(cavtos) wapav eir(ev)* idiws Kivdtvwr ctépw TOV AxirAréa THY 
Koopntelav. "Odrvptriddwpos eim(ev): | Exouev 57 havnv tod 
"Aomr16a 6Te (dias Kivdvvar avTov oréper. Kali] operas orepjvat, 
non yap 1) apxn adtaTTwTos éotiv THe TOA(EL). ‘O otpa(Tnyds) 
elm(ev)* Ta eipnuéva vropynuaticOh|var. “Avéyvav. Kat érépou 
emTLTTaApMAaTOS TO avTiypa(pov). “Apxov[tles “Epuod mod(ews) 
THS peyar(ns) Zapariove To. kal “AtroAXNovio. otpa(Tnyar) 
“Epporon (trou) TOL pid(rarot) Xaiperv. | "Ayirreds Neapxidou 
Tov Kat Kopyndiou ayopavopnaavros dry opevos [eles KoopnTetay 
UTO TLVOV KOTUNTaV UTréaxeTO emt cov éEny(nTevcev). “Hyav 
dé mpotpevopélvov avtov avadéEacOat Thy Koounteiav Sia TO 
fn TodXovs Exety THY TOA(LY) KOTUNTAS TAELOVOY OVTw@Y éTTI- 
Loyxav éEnyntav Aomidas Tatnp ‘Epya||koountevocavtos éare- 
vrev avTov (Oiws Kwdvvat THY Koo unt (Elav), KaOa Ov UTO“YnLaTwv 
gov aveiAnuTrrar. Ths ody apyns THe TON (EL) adtaTTT@TOV OVENS 
é& omroté|pou avtav émictédAETAal Gor OTwS aKodOVOa Tots ert 
cov ryevopevors Tpovoncar mpakéat, eis TO THY TOAW aTroNaPBetv 
THY apxKny. ¢ ‘Etovs) AB PappodOe uy. “Trréypatpar) | é&nyntys 
Kal yupvaciapyxos. 

From Hermopolis. The first part of this Blonent which we 
have omitted from our text, apparently dealt with a recalcitrant 
nominee to public office, but the fragmentary character of the 
papyrus makes it impossible to determine whether it treated of the 
nomination of Achilleus, or whether it cited precedents dealing 
with his case (cf. no. 183). It is probable that the two cases were 
not related. That part of the text which we have included in this 


ies ht 34-2 


45 


50 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


collection is our most important source of information on the obscure 
subject of appointments to public office in the Egyptian metropolis 
prior to the establishment of the municipal organization. ‘The 
problems which are presented in this document are discussed by 
the editors of the Rylands papyri in their commentary, by Jouguet 
(Rev. d. ét. grec. 30 (1917), 294 ff.), by Méautis (Hermoupolis-la- 
Grande, 118 ff), and by Van Groningen (Mnemosyne, 51 (1923), 
421 ff). 

Achilleus, a wealthy citizen of Hermopolis, was nominated by 
the board of cosmetae to a vacancy in the college. The strategus 
was notified, and on a stated day certain officials of the metropolis, 
a group of citizens, and Achilleus appeared at the tribunal of the 
governor. When the citizens by their acclamations signified their 
approval of the candidate, Achilleus sought to evade the office by 
making a counter-proposal, offering to accept the position of 
exegete, to which he would contribute two talents annually if he 
were released from the liturgy of superintending lands under lease. 
Olympiodorus, the advocate of Hermopolis, protested against the 
action of Achilleus, claiming that, if the latter were permitted to 
enter the higher office, he should pay the entrance fee which was 
apparently exacted from those who entered the more advanced 
positions without going through the regular cursus (if this is the 
proper interpretation of évted@ev). Olympiodorus added that 
Achilleus, by offering himself for exegete, could not decline the 
lower office where there was greater need for his services. When 
Achilleus persisted in his refusal on the plea that he was unable to 
bear the expense of the office, the strategus summoned the board 
of cosmetae to the hearing. They refused to withdraw their nomina- 
tion, and when they heard of the counter-proposal of Achilleus, 
they cited a decree of the emperor Antoninus to the effect that, 
when there were sufficient members in a higher office, a candidate 
should accept office in a magistracy where the board was weaker in 
numbers and where his services were more urgently required. At 
this point Aspidas, father of Hermas who was an ex-cosmete, in- 
tervened by offering himself as guarantor for Achilleus. This ended 
the proceedings before the strategus at this time. Apparently an 
interval was allowed Achilleus in case he wished to appeal. When he 


Wares 0 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


took no action, the board of archons wrote to the strategus to take 
the proper steps to have the nomination and appointment of 
Achilleus or his surety confirmed. A copy of this letter was in- 
cluded in the minutes along with the records bearing on the hearing 
before the strategus. It may be noted that the strategus crowns the 
candidate for the gymnasiarchy at Elephantine (Wilcken, Chresto- 
mathie, 4). 

The edict of Antoninus is important as there is no record of a 
similar law elsewhere. Unfortunately it is cited so concisely that 
its meaning is not absolutely certain, and the word ézidoyxous 
appears nowhere else in this connection and its interpretation is 
obscure. Apparently there were two classes of members in the 
various colleges of the official cursus. Of these, one is known as 
évapyxou or ctehavynddpot, who are actively engaged in the duties 
of the office. The term ézriXoyxou is apparently applied to super- 
numeraries of an honorary character who share the expenses of 
the office with the working members of the board. It is probable 
that wealthy and patriotic citizens were willing to share the burdens 
in return for the glory of enjoying the distinction of a title, and if 
there were a large number of such honorary members the expenses 
of the magistracy would be considerably lightened. Naturally there 
would be a desire to enter the higher offices, and apparently there 
was a high entrance fee exacted as a summa honoraria, The edict of 
Antoninus provided a remedy for those communities where some 
boards were excessively large, while others suffered from a lack of 
regular candidates. If we understand the law aright, it provided 
that a citizen could voluntarily present himself for membership in 
a board if not more than three supernumeraries were already attached 
to that office. If there were four or more, the candidate should 
accept membership in that board where his services were required 
and where the burdens were disproportionately severe because they 
were distributed among a smaller number. 3 

The procedure in nominating a cosmete or exegete in Hermopolis 
at this period may be thus summarized. A suitable candidate is 
coopted by the existing college and the nomination is sent to the 
board of archons who transmit it to the strategus. On a day ap- 
pointed there appear before the tribunal of the strategus representa- 


[ 533 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


tives of the college of archons, citizens of Hermopolis, and the 
nominee. Van Groningen (/oc. cit.) believes that the presence of 
the citizens indicates that the imperial government gave them a 
fictitious show of power in the election of magistrates, but we are 
inclined to believe that they had no formal or official: purpose in 
being present at the tribunal. When the citizens signified their 
approval of the candidate, he might signify his acceptance at once. 
In that case the strategus transmitted the notice of nomination and 
acceptance to his superior, the epistrategus, who makes the formal 
appointment, or instructs the strategus to do so. If, however, the 
candidate refused the nomination, the board which made the 
nomination was summoned. In the case of Achilleus, the cosmetae 
defend their action. The nominee might now appeal to the epistra- 
tegus or prefect on the ground of some illegality, or he might offer 
to surrender his property to his nominators, who would administer 
it for the term of appointment and discharge the’ expenses of the 
office from the revenue of the estate, possibly reserving a certain 
proportion of the income for the owner (cf. nos. 185, 198). Before 
Achilleus could act in either way, Aspidas offered to crown him as 
cosmete, thereby presenting himself as guarantor for Achilleus and 
liable to the obligations of the office in case Achilleus defaulted for 
any reason. According to law Achilleus became a cosmete-elect, 
and when the legal period for appeal had expired without any further 
action on his part the officials of the metropolis request the strategus 
to take the proper steps to confirm the appointment. 

It may be noted that, while the board of cosmetae makes the 
nomination, it is not responsible at this period for the obligations 
of the nominee, for these are voluntarily undertaken by Aspidas, 
who is a private citizen. Van Groningen advances the plausible 
theory that he offered himself as surety in order to relieve his son 
(who, however, is called ex-cosmete) from the burdens of office by 
ensuring the addition of another wealthy member to the board. If 
this is the case, it is possible that the board was responsible for their 
nominee and only escaped by the action of Aspidas. Van Gronin- 
gen’s theory leads to the further implication that the separate boards 
were constituted by acting members, honorary members, and ex- 
members who had not yet advanced to a higher grade in the cursus, 


[ 534 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


since Aspidas acts to relieve his son, Hermas, who is still an ex- 
cosmete, and, therefore, still liable for his share as a member of 
the college. It is clear that there were more than one in the 
membership of the boards of cosmetae and exegetae, and that the 
cost of these offices to the incumbents was very great. Achilleus 
voluntarily offered two talents as his share in the college of exegetae 
and sought to escape the lower office because of the greater expense, 
Since he offered this sum as an annual contribution, it may be in- 
ferred that the office was held for more than a year at a time, unless 
we accept Van Groningen’s theory that ex-officials remained as 
members of the board until they entered the higher grade. 

This document furnishes conclusive evidence that a citizen could 
hold a higher magistracy without having filled the lower (cf. pp. 
85 ff). Voluntary candidacy for office was probably not un- 
usual (cf. Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 38), but the abuse of such can- 
didacy, which we may infer from the edict of Antoninus, is a new 
and curious phase of ancient municipal history. Incidentally the 
law could not have been issued unless public liturgies had become 
so burdensome that the wealthy class had sought this method of 
escape. For the office of cosmete, cf. Oertel, Die Liturgie, 329 ff. 


182. DE MUNERIBUS VICANORUM 
(194 p. Chr.) 


BGU. 15, col. 1; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 393. 


"EE vrropynpaticpav “lovAiov Kouwrtiavod tod Kxpatictov | 
émistpatnyou érouvs devtépov Aoveiov | Semtipiov Yeounpov 
Ileptetvaxos LeBactod Mecopy B+ MeO (étepa). | KrAnOévtos 

an >) / Ara we / ef 2. 
Ilexdows Amrvyyews kai vrraxovoartos A:adén||\pos pytep eitrev. 
"Eav cou S0xnjt, cadecov Tov THs NetXov | wows KwMoypaypmartéa, 
e oe rf > aA / \ Se / >] 7 
Ol 0 nueTEpos evKanrel, Krn|OévTos Kal wy Vraxovaavtos Aptepi- 
dwpos eim[e]v. | Kapoypapparéa ovx eye » Neidov modus, dAda 
mpeaButépous | Svadexopévous. Aradeddos pytwp eimev. Kexé- 
NevoTat VT || TOV KATA KaLpoY HYyEMoVwY ExacToYV is THY EaUTOD 

/ \ \ > , ” /, > By / 

Ko|unv Kal wn am adds KOuNS els GAXNV petadaipecOar. | 
"Ort viv Kwpmoypapparers émnpedfer Tat acuvvnyopou|pulélvas, 
GvEOWKEY AUTOV TPAKTOPA apyupLKaV THs idias | Kopns els GAAHV 
Nertoupyeiav. “A€sol avayewookwv ta xel|kehevopéva pn adér- 


BOs Saio 


Io 


15 


On 


Io 


15 


20 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


a / 
KecOat amo ths idias eis adAoTpiav. | Kowvtiveavos eltrev. 


Stparnyos Starjuerat, 6 TOY éuav | wep@v KaTardBnraL, ér’ 
éue avatréurrev. 

From the Fayfim. In this document the procedure in cases of 
appeals from liturgies is shown. The appeal is heard before the 
epistrategus. The strategus is present, and the village-scribe is 
summoned to defend his nomination. Pekysis has an advocate, 
Diadelphus. The advocate cites a law, which he says had been 
regularly proclaimed by the prefects, to the effect that villagers 
should not be drawn from one village to another, but should 
remain in their own community. Wilcken points out that the law 
was imperfectly expressed, because there is no objection to a 
villager performing a liturgy in another district where he happens 
to have some property, but when he has already been assigned to a 
liturgy in his native village, he cannot be called upon to perform a 
liturgy in another district at the same time (Dig. 50. I. 17, 4). 
Cf. P. Giess. 58. 


183. DE IMMUNITATE ANTINOOPOLITANORUM 
(196 p. Chr.) 


BGU. 1022; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 29. 


The kpatiorne Bovrre ’Avtwoéwv | Néwv “EXAnvor | rapa 
Aovxiov Ovarepiov Aouvxpy|tiavod Matiseiov tod Kat Wdorte- 
villov cat A[ouxio]u Aoyyetvou “Epevviov | HavrAeviov tod Kal 
Meyarerciov. Ov« al[y]voeire, avdpes xpdtictot, OTe Twacar | 
[Aev]roupy.a[v] ad((@))etOnuev Tov adrayod | [KaT]a Statakw 
Beod “Adpiavod (Tod) Kat otxiotod || [Tt ]}ijs uerépals 70 ]ALe Jos. 
"Exel ody yevope|[vole [e]is PecraldJerdiav x[@]unv tod ’Apou- 
vo|[et]tLo]u ths [[Hpa ]eretdou wepisos, évOa yeou|[ yoliuev, éx[t] 
Ths StopO[ aa lews Snufooliov |..... NOTwY, 0 THs mpox[er]uévns 
couns || [kouloypaypateds “Adpodds Oéwvos kat érn|[pralv 
érédmxev nuas emt THS KaTaywyNs | TOD celTOU Tapa Ta SLaTe- 
Taypéva, KATA TO avay|[ Kato |v, Kvptoe, [T]7v mpdcodo[v] mpos 
bmas tov|[ov]uev akvodvtes, éav byiv S0&ni, avellveyxety Ta. 
Kpatiorw. émurtpatnywt | Kadzrovpvims Koveéoows: repli tovtou, 
Omws | KaTa Ta UdpxovTa nuiy dixata Kedevoas | Erép[olus 


[essen 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


av? hav Katactabjvat Kal | A\oyov avtov UToayely T@V TETON- 
Kenpuellvov Kat eis TO mépav émKpedatous (sic) pudralyOjvar. 
(2nd H.) Avev[ru]yeire. ("Erovs) 8 Avtoxpatopos | Kaicapos 
Aovkiov Xearrejuiolvy | Lelouxnpov EvoeBods Lleptivaxos | 
YeBacrod ’ApaBix(od) “ASiaBnvix[(od) Mea]opy «. (3rd H.) 
Aovxzos || [O]varépios A[o]ux[p]ntiavos érridédoxa | cat éypawa 
uTrép ‘Epevviov ur [et ]Soto0s | yoa[upalra. 

From Antinoopolis. This appeal of citizens of Antinoopolis is of 
interest because of its mode of procedure. It is directed to the senate 
of their native city with the request that this body transmit their 
appeal to the epistrategus. Ordinarily an appeal was forwarded 
directly to the epistrategus. For the immunity enjoyed by the 
Antinoopolitans, cf. nos. 170, 176; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 397. 


184. DE CONNUBIO ANTINOOPOLITANORUM 
ET AEGYPTORUM 
(saec. 11 p. Chr.) 


Compt. rend. de Pacad. d. inscr. et bell. lett. 1905, 160 ff.; 
Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 27. 


Ki tots avayvwa Oetat Wndio|ualo]s brevavtiov Ti éotw Kalra 
, A \ / > \ ¢ / ? \ \ 4 
vopov 7 Kata diatakwv. | Efi ya] varevavtiov éotiy 76 || walpa]- 
Sevypa ovK toyupov, tpolkpeilvlovtas yap mavtos ovTivoa|odv 
e / \ 4 . / > / \ 
ot voor Kal dvatdéers. | “Epuddwpos Kituyxidous Bou|Xeutis 
eirev. “Avayvocbé||trw 1) Statakis Lpoxdrov. *AvalyvooGel- 
a(ns) “Emi tod 6 (érous) Geod | Aidtov ’Avt[@]veivov ‘APdp 
Ka.” Nel|pectov “Appwviov Bovrev|[rs] edev. Ilept tovtov 
as é0||Ee[v], mpocdwrncdtw nuetv | 0 mputavixos. Aovxtos 
> / \ Ss ¢ > / O77 e ral 
Atrorwva|pios mputavixes elev. “H émrelyauia €d00n a)metv 
mpos | Adyur[ti]ou[s] car’ éEaiperov || bird Tod Oeod ‘ASdpiavod, 
nv\mep ((ov)) ove &éyovoe Navxpa((rt))|Telrat, wy Tots vopous 
xpa@|ueOa, kal Ta Tepl THs érruyalulas Tad avayevacke. || 
Kai dvayvovtos peta thv ((a))|avayvoow. ~Aptotaios Bov- 
((re[v]))|AeuTHs elzrev. Todro ovy amalE évy...... KeKeL- 
pntat, | adAa Kal mrcovaxis, (di|los ex[plere[v] ucv tae | 
“EAAnvix[ Gt AO(?) you. “HOEAn|oa....v mepitpomny elt. veer. 

era 

Ke ars 7] [LEU a te 


Bistey ct! 


25 


30 


20 


25 


30 


Io 


T5 


20 


25 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


From this document we learn that Antinoopolis received the 
same code of laws as Naucratis on the occasion of its foundation 
by Hadrian. The Antinoopolitans, however, enjoyed the rights of 
intermarriage with citizens of other Egyptian towns—a privilege 
which the people of Naucratis did not possess. It is evident that 
the former city had a senate and prytanies of a form usual in other 
Greek cities. 


185. DE MUNERE EORUM QUI VECTIGALIA EXIGUNT 
(200 p. Chr.?) 


P. Oxy. 1405. 

avert eh hae p.... mwapeyop[n|oas .......] evdnrov éotuv 
pn tot | [Tapet]os juov thy Tapaxywpnow | [yevéo |Oas adra 
TOL els THY RevToupyiay || ....mévml, bs avartaBav cod 


ta | urdpxo[tja ro Aoulrov Tov ..]ro...u|TeKo[ Dd] mapéEe 
Kal THY AeLTOUpyiav atro|TAnpwceEL. TO yap Tametov Huav | TOV 
ToLoUTMY Tapaxywpnoewy || ovK éepetetar. “H O€ érreTespia cov 
é|x TovTov ovdév BrXAaBNoeTAaL, ovdE eis TO | THua UBpercOnoer. 
IIpoeréOn ev "AreEav|Spetar n’ (tous) Dappod™. | 

Atpnriwt Aewvidnt otpa(tnyar) ‘Ofvpuyx(irov) || mapa Aip- 
iov Yreddvou “ArpHtos py|tpos Tacop[a]mi[os] amo Kopns 
Luyxéda. | The everrdone nuépar Euabov avtwvo|udcbar pe vd 
Avpnriov “Amoitos Ilatatos | untpds Anuntpodtos amo Tis 
avThs Kl @]||uns efs mpaxtopeiayv apyupixav Kopl yn ||TiKOY AnL- 
paTav THS avTHS Luynéha Tov | évertatos x (érouvs) ws evTopov 
kab émitn|Secov. Ouvx ava Adyar ody ovSEé pds [7T0(?)] | wépos THS 
NetToupyias, GAN €Evotavopevo| ¢ | || avTd Kata) THY TpoKeLpévny 
Geiav | [drataEw] dnf[A]O Eveww pe wopov émi &......... 

From Oxyrhynchus. The first part of this document appears to 
be an edict of the prefect issued in answer to an appeal from an 
Egyptian who offered to cede his property to the imperial fiscus 
for the year in lieu of his performing a liturgy to which he had 
been nominated. The prefect states that the government does not 
administer such estates, but that it goes to the man who nominated 
him for the office, and he administers the estate and defrays the 
expenses of the liturgy from the revenue. The recipient of this 
rescript is guaranteed against loss of status and corporal punishment. 


Ls B8) 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


Unfortunately the document is badly mutilated and almost un- 
decipherable in ll. 5—6 (cf. commentary of Grenfell-Hunt, Joc. cit.), 
and the exact details of the law cannot be determined. It is evident, 
however, that liturgies as well as magistracies could be avoided in 
Egypt by appealing to the prefect with an offer to cede one’s property 
to the nominator. If we read [deyo]|uévar in 1. 5 (although the 
editors, who proposed [Sedo]wévar, note that the traces of the 
first letter do not suit this reading), we may have proof of the 
existence of a form of avridocus or exchange of properties similar 
to the earlier Athenian custom. In this connection a rescript of 
Antoninus may be cited (Cod. F. 10, 67. 1), which instructs a 
certain Basilides to plead his case (before the governor), if he thinks 
that some one else is more capable of performing the liturgy. 
Cf. no. 181, where there is, apparently, reference to a similar cession 
of an estate to avoid a liturgy or magistracy. Cf. Mitteis, Chresto- 
mathte, 375, for a copy of the edict dealing with this question, and 
no. 198, where, in a later period, the law appears to require that, 
in cases where the estate is surrendered by a nominee to the 
nominators, two-thirds of the revenue may be devoted to the 
expense of the magistracy, and the remainder is returned to the 
owner. 

The second part of the document is an appeal from a villager to 
the strategus. He had been nominated to the office of tax-collector 
_ of the village by his predecessor in that office as a suitable candidate 
and financially able to support the liturgy. Stephanus cites the 
proclamation of the prefect and offers to cede his property on the 
same terms as expressed in the edict on the ground, apparently, that 
his income is insufficient. The document is important because the 
method of nomination is different from the earlier practice, whereby 
nominations were made by the comarchs or other village-officials 
who sent a list of candidates to the strategus, and he in turn for- 
warded it to the epistrategus who selected the candidates by lot. 
We also learn that the villager sent his appeal to the strategus, 
although in the first document which he had cited the appeal was 
apparently forwarded to the prefect. Cf. pp. 99 ff- 

The document is dated in the eighth year of some emperor and 
the editors assign it to A.D. 200. It is contemporary with no, 188, 


[ 539 | 


IO 


T5 


20 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


which must belong to the period after the introduction of the 
municipal organization and it is possible that both documents may 
belong to a later period, either to the eighth year of Alexander 
Severus or of Gallienus. Cf. Wilcken, Archiv, 6 (1920), 420 f. 


186. DE VICIS DEMINUENDIS 
(ca. 200 p. Chr.) 


Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 8; Festschrift Hirschfeld, 125. 


PAP aa OG y(vovTat)). line see wtb (Spaxpat) wOFG y(ar«Kods) | 
eloa[v.]. 8..... (Spaypat) XO, y(lvovrat) (Spaypal) mnFG 
x(arxovs), || T.ay..., éb Hs 0 Kwpoypa(upareds) €dnd(woer) 
tovs | ém’ avtns advaypa(dhopévous) avdpas é« told] | mwreiorou 
éyNenNouTrévat, yeyovévat | yap THY KOuNV TO TdadaL, STE Ked[ d- 
Mara) | | dnow éorabn vd avtav [8t]||\SocOas, aro avdpav pKn, 
viv [dé] | carnvtnkévac eis wovous ..,| ad’ dv avaxeywpnKévat 
-e,| Kal ogelrAecy TO értBarrov | KoudicOAvac S| corx(noews) | || 


UTOKEL(EVOV) KwMoyp(aupmaTtelar) éb.. | AoylopMO.......--- 
».|y(tverar) .. | eriotdtes hur.. (paypal) d..| wapava.r.. 
(TrUDOU) NGAOTEDAL ns || LEDs ae ert Boe, | rpo(cdtaypadopueva) 
(Spayywat) yp y(aAxol) y, | edodv..... Eb a8 


The origin of this fragment of papyrus is unknown. While there 
are numerous documents in the third century and in the Byzantine 
period which portray the decline of village communities (Rostow- 
zew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 206 ff.), there are a few from the second 
century which reveal the same tendency (Wilcken, Festschrift 
Hirschfeld, 125 ff.). Wilcken connects the subject-matter of this 
document with the plague which was brought back from the 
Orient by the armies of Marcus and Verus. In BGU. 902, which 
apparently belongs to the same period, the village had decreased 
from eighty-five to ten. Here the original census had been one 
hundred and twenty-five, and of the remainder after the plague 
a number had deserted the village. The document is an appeal for 
a lightening of the taxes (cf. Wilcken, Joc. cit.). Cf. for similar 
documents of the same period, P.S.J. 101, 102, 105. 


[ 540 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


187, DE MUNERIBUS OXYRHYNCHI 
(201 p. Chr.) 
PP OxIASAS 


Lapariove THe Kal ‘Opiwve év[dp|yaxr | yupvacrdpyor Kata- 
Seovs THV HrL|kiav Sia Tod Kata Tatépa wdmov | ’Atiwvos 
yupvaciapynoartos, || Kal “AyiAdtwve évdpyws éEnynrhe | dia 
"AYARiwvos Tod Kal Lapatrap|uwvos viod cai diaboyxou, | Tapa 
Atoyévouvs Lapatriwvos Kai Aov|xiov “Epuiov, audorépov am 
"O£u||piyyov Torews, eicdobévtwy b|7d TOD THS TOAEwS Yypap- 
patéws | yvoune Tov Kolvod Tov apyovTwr | eis éerriuédecay 
émuskeuns Kal KkaltacKeuns “Adpiavdv Oepuar. || Aitovpeba 
ériuctanhnva. €x Tov | THs Toews Adyou eis TEeLUNY yel|vOv emt 
NOyou apyuplou TddavTa | Tpia, yi(veTar) Ary, OV NOyov Ta~oper | 
[as] déov éoriv. ("Erous) @ || A[v]roxparopwv Kaicdpor | 
Aovxiov Yertipiov Leounpov | EtceBods Leptivaxos ApaB.xod | 
"AdcaBnvixod UHapOtxod Meyiorov | xal Madpxov Avpnriov 
-Avtovivou || EiceBods LeBacrar [[xai | LovBAiov Serripiov 
Téra]] | Kaicapos XeBactod, Pappod&s. | (2nd H.) Acoyévns 
Lapar[t]wvos aitod|wa: ta tlo]d apyupiov tadrav||ra tpia ws 
mpokitat. (3rd H.?) Afov]|Kvos “Epytov cuvartodpat | ta Tod 
apyuplov Taravra tpia | a[s mpo]xras. 


From Oxyrhynchus. This document is our chief source of in- 
formation about the method of appointment to metropolitan litur- 
gies before the civic organization was introduced. ‘he names of 
candidates were given in (eiodo00évtwy) by the secretary of the 
metropolis after consultation with the council of archons (ef. 
pp. 27 ff; 99 ff). Itis probable that the lists were forwarded to the 
strategus and from his office to the epistrategus who made the 
appointments by lot as in the villages. In some cases, however, 
appeals were directed to the prefect, and he also received names of 
candidates for certain offices (cf. P. Amh. 64; P. Br. Mus. 1220, 
dated a.D. 202-207). 


[54-280] 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


Io 


T5 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


188. DE VECTIGALIBUS 
(ca. 202 p. Chr.) 


P. Oxy. 890; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 280. 


Aovk«os Lertiptos Avpyrdcos | Sapariwv o cal ArroXwvaptos 
kal ws | xpnuatifm évapyos mpvtavs ths | “O€vpuyyertov 
movews Avpnriwt || Newvidne otparnyar tat prr|tatar yaipewy. | 
Tovs amrarteia[Oa]t wédrovtas ad’ ov | [6]p[eir]ovar rie wore] 
yopovvtwv | [eis dslaypadny tav éx Royou rs || [7oAE]os 
dvaypadouévav kal viv | [ypddouév] cor mpos TO pH éurrodil- 
[CecOar 7) \v elompakw tod iepwratov | [Tapeiov.] Eict 8é: 


Avpnarsor | [...-- kai ‘A]rrodd@vios kat Aowerreall[vos of tpets 

Slapariwvos tod cai |[......-s ayop |javouncavtos (Spaxpas) 

Uy NL si ye eee ur “Hp laxNas ovoparos ast. 0k ok + dis ae ce ane 
.QT 


From Oxyrhynchus. The prytanis of Oxryhynchus forwards to 
the strategus a list of citizens owing the city treasury. This was 
apparently a necessary preliminary to the proceedings about to be 
instituted against the defaulters. It would seem that the city paid 
a certain amount to the imperial treasury as tribute. There is no 
indication that the city council was liable for the deficiency at this 
period, but unfortunately we cannot determine where the liability 
would fall in case the proceedings against the defaulters failed. This 
document may have some bearing on the interpretation of no. 202. 
Cf. pp. 99 ff. The document is contemporary with no. 185, and 
therefore dates ca. A.D. 202, or immediately on the introduction 
of the municipal organization. ‘The unique character of the docu- 
ment is probably due to the fact that it comes from the transitional 
period. The strategus Aurelius Leonides served both before and 
after the reconstruction if this date is correct. It is, however, 
possible that he was in office ca. 230 (cf. no. 185, note) as he bears 
the name Aurelius in both periods. 


[ 542 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


189. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS SEPTIMI SEVERI 
AD AURELIUM HORIONEM 
(202 p. Chr.) 


P. Oxy. 705, ll. 54-79; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 4.07. 

Adroxpatwp Kaicap Afolv«cos [Z]emrip[cos SJe[ou]fjpos || 
EiceS[7|s Heptivaé SeBacros ApaBixod AdiaBnuixos | TlapA- 
xov Meyio[tolu [«]at Avtoxpatwp Kaicap | Mapxo[s] Avpndtos 
’"Avrwvivos EvaeBys LeRacros | AvpnrAtwr ‘Opetwv yaipew. | 
 Arrodexopueba ce Kal TavTys THs érLdocews Hv || aEvois érrvoobvas 
Tais Képats TOV Ok€vpuyyertav | arrodidovs aporBnv éeveTHoEws. 
T[o] duocov 89 Kat | é[a]l tovtov gudrayOnoetar Kai Kador[e 
n]0éAncas apeltactpertov eis Erepov tu Oatravjo[ec]Oae THv 
yapw. | "Eotw 8é 4 akiwars. || Tots eveverrators Adtoxpa- 
tlolpce Selounp]ar cat “Avtaviver | tols mavtav avOpadrav 
cwThnpaww [Kat evepyerass | Avpydcos ‘Opeiwy yevdouevos otpa- 
tylylos Kat dpyidixac|tns ths Naulm|potatns ToAEws TOV 
"AreEavipéwy yaiperv. | Komal tives rod “O€upuyxeirou vopod, 
@® piravOpwrotal|ro. AvToxpatopes, év ais éyod Te (Kal) of vioi 
pov ywpia KexType|Oa, of[ 6 |dpa eEnoVevncay évoxrovpevat bd 
TOV Kat étos | NeLTOUpPYL@Y TOU TE Tapelov Kal THS Trapal > |v- 
[A]axhs THv | Tomwy, Kwwduvevovat TE TWL Mev TapEeiws TapaTro- 
ré|oOar, THY S€ twetépav ynv ayedpyntov KatariTreiv. || Evo 
[o]iv cai tod diAavOperov Kati Tov ypnotpov otoxalé| dpe |vos 
Bovrouat eis avaxtnow avtav éridociv | zt[wa] Bpayetav 
éxadoTnt tromaacbar eis cvvwvnv | x|wpilov, ob 1 mpdcodos 
KatateOnoetat eis Tpodas Kal | d[amd]lvas tav Kar eros NevToUp- 
YNTOVTOV ETL TOL eee ee eeeeees 

1.78. x[¢prjov Grenfell-Hunt; x[wpijov Wilcken. 


From Oxyrhynchus. This is one of the few endowments known 
from Egypt, and is of interest because the consent of the emperors 
was obtained. The endowment was made to relieve villages in the 
region of Oxyrhynchus which had become impoverished because 
of the pressure of imperial liturgies. In]. 77 the expression cuvwyny 
is noteworthy, as it implies that Horion was contributing a certain 
sum to each village for the purchase of property whose income would 
be used to defray the expenses of the liturgies, and the remainder 


[ 543 ] 


35 


60 


65 


7O 


75 


Io 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


of the purchase price would be paid by the village. The endowment 
of a school at Como by Pliny was made along similar lines, and 
Horion apparently made his gift, actuated by the same motives as 
Pliny. 
190. QUERELLAE VICANORUM CONTRA POSSESSORES 
(207 p. Chr.) 

Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 4284, ll. 1-17. 

Avovucias otp(atnyet) Apoww(olrov) ‘Hpaxd(eidov) peptd(os) | 
mapa ‘Eptéws XToTonTews pea Butépovu kat UaB8odros [Il jaBod- 

\ / > / pls / 4 \ 

[r]os untpos LeydOuos apyepodov Kat ‘Epséo[s Ua]etoews Kal 
’ / ¢ f ob] / a \ a) 
Arbyxews “Opiwvos kai “Eootpews Llaovitntos | cai Anpua 
Anuaros Kai ‘Opcevovgews ‘Epte[ ws] cai Ilet[e]oovyou Yérovu 
Kai "“Opov pntpds Oatcatos cal Lwrnpixou amdtopos wntpds 
OepwovOews cal Ikdtos exd|cews cal Iatitos LataBodtos Kal 
IlaB8odros laBodtos cai Kavvetros Latitos cat Swra WaBodtos 

\ A lal x 4 / » Wee J , 
kal Ilaetros LataBodtos Kai Lexicews Verynovos cai Atrvyxews 
"Amvy||yews cai “ABodtos LataBodtos cai U[axtdloews “Epséws 
k[at] Iloygeiros Marairos xai Ilaxtoews ((Martaitos xa 
Ilaxtcews)) “Amvyyews cat Méravos Iakicews cal ’Aciletos 
Kav[ei]ros cat Amvyyews Lapariwvos tév Ke Kal TL @]v AouTrav 
Snpociwv yewpyov Kwuns Loxvorraiov Nyjcov. Oi Kvpsoe Huov 
Orotratot Kal ant tyros | AvToKpdtopes Leounpos Kab’ Avtwvetvos 
avateiravtes [é]v (Tht) éalv]ra@v Aiyirrra., we? bv TrEio(T)ov 
b] a > / > / \ \ > b) a f 
ayabev édwpycavto, nUéXncay Kai Tos év adAodaTrHL ScaTpi- 
Bovtas trav|tas Kattévar ets THY diay oixeiay ex KOYavTes Ta 
Biata [Kal dvlowa, kai Kata Tas lepds avtav év[Kerev]oess 
KateconrAOapev. “Eyouévwv ody yuav [tHe] Katepyacias | THe 
atroxanupbeions aiytaritu 6.) ye Exaotov Kalo Svvapts, Opoevs 

’ \ r \ > 4 / > a 4 lal \ > 

Tus avnp Biavos Kal avOddns Tul yyav lov érArAOev Huiv ody aber- 
dois avtovd tétpace KL @]Av@v THY Kal|Tepyaciav Kal KaTacTropay 
moeiaOar Kal exhoBav nas, iW [éx To]v[ To ]v Kata TO TpdTEpon Eis 

\ > \ 7 \ / > / fal n 
tv] adXo[ Samy dvywopev Kat movot avtiroincovtas [Tt ]hs xfs, 


_Onrod| ev 5é cor, KUpLE, THY TOUT@Y Biav. OTE yap cvvEetapopor 


y[e]ivovtar THv Kata unva yeu vo lwévav év THe Kone ETLpEpla Lav 
Te Kal émtBorov oil T]iKOv Te Kal ap|yupiK@v TeXeoMaTOV, Gra 
Kal ovcia éotly brép is Kat étos Siaypad[opely povos nets 
Spaypas durxeiNias TeTpakoolas Kal MOVvwOY TOUTWY TA TETPATIOOA 


[ 544 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


TrE|oTa dvTa Tas v[o]uas Toettar. Kat ovderwrorte éduTolv |p- 
[ynolav é[x]poBodvres tods Kata xpovouvs KwpmoypaypaTews. 
“Odev kata 76 dvayKaiov rnv [éri] ce katadu|ynv trovovpmeba Kab 
a&vodpev, éav cou Th THY NL SOENL, KEAedT AL, AYOHVaL avTOL Vs] Erb 
o[o]u cal Siaxodaar jpav pos avTov Tpos TO ex THS ahs BonOetas 
exdixnbévres Suvy||Oamev THe yhe cxoralew Kal Tais érBalr]- 
Novoais Hueliv] Ypelats mpocKkaprepely, Tov b€ Opoéa Kal Tovs 
aderdlo]ds cuvershopas eivar Tots Snpwootous TeXéopacr Kal | 
Nut[olupyety tLas] dppolovcas avdtois ALTOUpyias Kal éy[ecOar 
€&] icov [) was mavtas Ths oropads THs atroxadud(Aeions ys, 
iy dev ev THe idtat cuppévovTes THe TUXNL cov | evyapicTety. 
Atevrvyeu. ) 
l. 9. éxdorov = éxdoTwv. 

i: 13. KWLOYPALUATEWS = KWLLOYPA[L[LAT EAS. 

]. 15. ovveeopdpas = cvverrpdpovs. 

From the Fayim. The relations of the great landlords to the 
small proprietor and to the village community are clearly indicated 
in this petition. These villagers had fled from their homes and 
engaged in a life of brigandage. On the issuance of the edict of 
Severus and Antoninus granting amnesty to all fugitives, they had 
returned to the village of Socnopaei Nesus and taken up leases in 
the public lands along the shore. ‘Vhereupon a certain Orseus and 
his brothers attempted to drive the fugitives away, as apparently 
they had done before, in order that they might continue to pasture 
their flocks on the lands thus vacated. Furthermore these men were 
so powerful that the village-secretary was always terrified. Asa result 
Orseus and the members of his family paid no tribute or taxes and 
never performed any of the liturgies. Nor had they taken their due 
share of waste land to be cultivated which had been assigned to 
them. The petitioners apply to the strategus to bring these men to 
judgement in order that they themselves may not be forced to flee 
from their homes again and that Orseus and his party may be 
compelled to take their due share of public liturgies. This is the 
earliest documentary evidence for the encroachment of the wealthy 
landed proprietor on the holdings of the peasants and of the defiance 
of the local authorities by the rich (cf. pp. 203, 216 ff; Wilcken, 
Chrestomathie, 354, 3553 Archiv, 3 (1906), 548 ff). 


AMA Gy eh 35 


5 


5 


20 


25 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


191. DE TRIBUBUS METROPOLEOS 
(212 p. Chr.) 


P. Oxy. 1030; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 36. 


(5th H.) ae. | (Ist H.) Yepyvar apdodoypa(upartet) a pvr(js) 
B mep.od(ov) | mapa Acoyévous. (2nd H.) Iazrovra@rtos | tod 
Lwapta pntpos Tepedtos || adm’ Ofvpiyyov trorews. “O | euod 
Kat THS omoTratpias pou | adeAPHs Oanavos Sodros ‘Ioropy| Tos 
itepeTns atexX(vos) avaypado|uevos er’ audodov Iappévous || 
Ilapadeicou érer(evtnoe) THL Sed(PovTe) Eres. | Avo émrididw@pe 
To UTromynua | aEvdv ald]rov avaypadhvar év | Tht TOV [o]uolwv 
Takéet, Kai | duvide THY TOD Kuplov Mapxov || AdpnAiov [= Jeounpou 
"Avtwvivou | toynv un eredcOat. (“Etous) ca | Ad’toxpdz[o]pos 
Kaicapos Mapxovu | Avpnriov [Xe]ounpov Avtwvivor | IlapOtx0d 
Meyiorov Bpetavyixod || Meylatou EvaeBots LeRacrod | [[unvos 
‘Adpsavod]] «. (3rd H.) Acoyévns | Ilatrovra@tos éridédmxa Kal 
6uo@|wexa Tov 6pxov. | (4th H.) LepHvos aphodoypa(upareds) 
éxyov Tovl|Tov TO icov. 


From Oxyrhynchus. This declaration is dated shortly after the 
introduction of the municipal organization into Egypt by Severus. 
Oxyrhynchus was divided into tribes and circuits numbered 
numerically. The amphodon is a geographical division, each in- 
cluding a tribe (P. Oxy. 1119; Wilcken, Grundziige, 348 f.). The 
tribe had an archon and a secretary, and apparently there was a 
cycle according to which each tribe took the municipal liturgies in 
rotation (Wilcken, /oc. cit.). ‘The tribal secretary also received the 
registrations of deaths, and probably all similar records connected 
with the census in his particular district. In P. Br. Mus. 2, 281, 
the death certificates from the villages are forwarded to the village- 


secretary. Sometimes the royal scribe receives these declarations 
(cf. note ad /oc.). 


[ 546 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


192, EDICTUM CARACALLAE DE CIVITATE 
PEREGRINIS DANDA 
(212 p. Chr.) 


P. Guess. 4.0, col. 1 (vol. 111, p. 164); Mitteis, Chrestomathte, 377; 
Segré-Beltrami, Revista di Filologia, 45 (1917), 16 ff.; Meyer, 
Furistische Papyri, 1; Girard, p. 203. 


[Avtoxpatwp Kaicap Ma]lpxos Avpnrilos Leounjpos] Avto- 
vivo[s] S[eBacro]s rAéyes. | [Nuvi bé veenoavta yp]n wadrov 
avlaBaropuevoy tals aitias kali tolvs] A[eB]érAXAov[s | Enrezv, 
Omws av Tots Oleots tlot|s ablavlarous evyapioTyncayps, OTL THe 
tovauTne | [vixens ériunoav Kal odolv éue curfeTnlpnoav. Tou- 
yapodv vouilw [o]itw pel|[ yadompetas Kai evoeB las Ov[va]obar 
THL weyanel[ O|TnTL aVTOY TO ixavov Trol[ Ely, et TOdS Eévous, oo ]a- 
Kus av UL 7 ]ercéXO[ wa |tv Eis Tovs ewovs av[ Op |wzrous, | [eis Ta ya- 
peotnpia TO |v Oew@y cvverrevéy[Kotl|us. Aidwpe toi[y luv &rral[ ov 
Eévous Tols Kata T|nv oiKovpévny T[orcT jeiav  Pwpaior, [u ]évov- 
tos | [wavtos yévous TodiTevplatav xop[is] Tv [ded]ectixiwv. 
"O[d]eires [y]ap ro || [wAjos wpoTay ov povovy cuptrolvety 
mavta a[rArA]a Hon «[a]i THe viene evrreprec|[AHbOar. “Ere be 
Kal tovTo TO Oidtlaypa o[ujadwoe: [THv] weyadevotnTa [Told 
‘Pwpalilov Syuov dua to THY avtTny ak&iav] mepi tods [Eévolus 
yeyevnobar. (Reliqut versus omisst sunt.) 

l. 2. vuxnoavra, Segré. 1. 4. éripnoav Kai, Segré. 

1. 7. Ta xaptorypia, Segré. l. 9. roditevularwv, xwpis, Meyer. 

1. 10. [mpdmrav ob povov cvpzrolvetv, Segré. 

l.rr. [AjpOo. "Eri de Kai todro 76 duarjaypya é[pJaddoe, Segré; 

[AcioOar. "Eru dé Kal tovto ro mplaypa €[..].Awoe, Meyer. 

1. 12. [01a 76 riv adriyy dgiav] rept Tous [E€vo]us, Segré. 

The origin of this document is unknown, but it probably came 
from Heptacomia. The papyrus is unfortunately preserved in a 
seriously mutilated condition, and its restoration is an exceedingly 
difficult problem. We have followed the text adopted by Beltrami 
incorporating the restorations proposed by Segré (/sc. cit.). The 
document presents to us the only copy of the edict of Caracalla 
whereby he conferred Roman citizenship on the peregrini in the 
empire. This version is manifestly a Greek translation of the 


[547.2] 35-2 


10 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


original edict published in Latin. he translator retained the 
Latin word dediticiz, apparently because there is no adequate phrase 
to express the meaning in Greek, and the discussion of the edict 
depends almost entirely on the interpretation of the word. Meyer, 
whom Wilcken follows, interprets dediticit as Naoypadhovpevor or 
those subject to the poll-tax (Meyer, doc. czt.; Wilcken, Grundziige, 
55 f.). Wilcken estimates the population of Egypt at this period 
at about seven millions, and assumes that those possessing a fortune 
of 100,000 sesterces, or about two millions, received citizenship by 
this edict. It is probable that his estimate of the wealthy class is 
entirely too high, and if the same proportion prevailed in the rest 
of the empire, the use of the word azracz is a travesty (Archiv, 5, 
426 ff.). Rostowzew (Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 222 ff.) identifies the 
Aaoypahovpevoe with the ouoroyor, and assumes that the latter 
is a translation of dediticiz. However, the terms ouoXoyou and 
Aaoypadhovpevo. must have been perfectly familiar to the trans- 
lator, and the scribe would undoubtedly have used one or other of 
them if they expressed the meaning required. The definition of 
dediticit in the legal language is also contrary to this interpretation, 
for Gaius (Inst. 1, 14) explains the term as applied to those who had 
fought against Rome and who had surrendered on defeat. It could 
not, therefore, be applied to the Egyptians without great difficulty. 
Moreover Justinian does not recognize the class of dediticiz, and 
certainly does not apply the term to payers of poll-tax (Cod. F. 
7. 5. 1; 7. 6. 1). The interpretation of Segré (4tt della soc. it. 
per il progresso delle sctenze, Settima Riunione, Siena, 1913, 1013 ff.) 
seems worthy of consideration. He joins the phrase ywpis tadv 
dedevtixiwy with the genitive absolute construction to which it 
logically belongs and explains dedevtixiwy as civitates stipendiariae. 
The edict, according to this view, preserved the privileged position 
of federated states and colonies with Latin rights, etc., but con- 
ferred Roman citizenship on members of tribute-paying states, and 
removed the legal disabilities under which these people labored in 
the eyes of the law (Mitteis, Rezchsrecht und Volksrecht, 90 ff, 
159 ff.). Latin rights were finally abolished by Justinian (Cod. F. 
7. 6. 1, 6) as no longer having any meaning (supervacua adiectio 
Latinitas aboleatur). 


[ 548 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


Wilcken properly discounts the motive for the edict cited by 
Dio (4rchiv, 5, 426 ff.), but his own theory that the edict was 
promulgated to foster the imperial cult seems equally wide of the 
mark. This cult first originated in the provinces where the gift of 
Roman citizenship was rarely enjoyed, and was especially fostered 
by the non-Roman element (cf. pp. 163 ff). His theory might be 
true for Egypt, but not for any of the provinces. In our opinion the 
edict was designed to relieve the peculiar situation which had 
developed in the municipalities at this period. In Egyptian cities 
both Romans and Alexandrians enjoyed a general immunity from 
local liturgies (cf. nos. 165, 173), and it is very probable that in the 
non-Roman communities throughout the rest of the empire the 
Romans enjoyed similar privileges. The veterans on discharge were 
granted Roman citizenship and general immunity from liturgies (cf. 
pp. 106 f-; no. 38) in the cities where they took up their residence. 
In many cities we find guilds of Roman citizens who form a 
corporation distinct from the general mass of the citizens, although 
there is occasionally cooperation. Most important, however, is the 
fact that in the great number of inscriptions which record liturgies, 
there are very few cases which indicate that a Roman discharged 
these duties for the municipality in which he resided. He was first 
and foremost a citizen of Rome, and by the law of orzgo this took 
precedence over any claim which the city in which he lived might 
exercise. In the few cases where Romans undertook liturgies, it 
is probable that such duties were discharged voluntarily or before 
the grant of citizenship was received. Under the empire Roman 
citizenship was granted freely to individuals and especially to ex- 
magistrates in communities which enjoyed major or minor Latin 
rights (cf. pp. 88, 191 f). The gift was hereditary, and there was, 
therefore, a constantly increasing class of residents in every non- 
Roman community which could claim immunity from local litur- 
gies. This class usually consisted of the wealthy members of the 
community, and the burdens of the city, which were constantly 
increasing, fell with greater severity upon a narrower circle of the 
community whose members were less able to undertake them. 
Under these conditions the municipal organization was in grave 
danger of complete disruption, and the imperial treasury was 


[ 549 ] 


20 


25 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


consequently faced with a serious problem. The legislation of Cara- 
calla gave the municipalities a new lease of life by distributing the 
burdens of residents in a more equable manner. The immunity of 
veterans was reduced to a period of five years, at least for a time 
(cf. no. 177). The guilds of Roman citizens disappeared in the 
non-Roman states, and the only class which enjoyed exemption 
from local liturgies were the members of the imperial nobility 
(cf. pp. 103 ff.). The edict of Caracalla was a piece of wise and 
just legislation, and might have been followed by far-reaching results 
had not the empire been swept by famine, plague, and civil war in 
the third century. The disastrous effect of these evils was augmented 
to such an extent by a great increase in the burdens of taxation and 
by the development of the bureaucratic system that the muni- 
cipalities were unable to recover financially, and their political 


development was stifled (cf. pp. 190 ff.; 228 ff). 


193. EDICTUM CARACALLAE DE REDITU 
AEGYPTIORUM IN AGROS 
(215 p. Chr.) 


P. Giess. 40, col. 11, ll. 16-29; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 22. 

Ailyvrreloe raves, of eiow év “AreEavdpeiat, kal wadtoTa 
ly ]pocKot, otrives medel Vyacu] | dA[AoPev K]ai edpapas e[b]pi- 
o[xe]oOae Svvavra[t], ravtne TavTas éyBAHoLmol Eloy, of vx] | 
pl év ros ye yowpéutro[ poe Kal vadtac Trotd[ pw |cou Exeivoi Te oi Tues 
Karamov mplo|s to | vroxaieww ta Baralvetla xatadépovor. 
Tods dé &dXovs ey a], oftives THt TWANOe[e] Tae || (Siwe Kali 
ovlyt ypnoet Tapdooovet THY TONY. Vaparretots Kai ETEpats TLoly 
éop|taci[ wows 4 |wépars etwOévat Kataryewv Oucias eiverev Tavpous 
Kal ddra Twa | évrp[v]ya 4} Kal ddrras Al ulépars Acyumrrious 
pavOava: dia ToDTO ovK cio KwAUVTEOL. | ’E[Keivor] KwrALV]ecOar 
ode[t]Aovow, oltwves hevyouot Tas yopas Tas idias, iva pn | 
€.... AypolKov ToLdat, ovxXL pévTot, (oiTwves) THY TOALL|Y THY 
"AreEavdpéwy THY Aaptrpol|rat[nv] ((nv)) idetv Oéror[res ets 
avTny cuvépxYovTat 7) TroNeLTLKMTEpas Cons Eve|Kev [7 mp laypa- 
Teas Tpol a |xaipou évOdde x[a]répyovtra. Me &[rlepa. ’Emi- 
yewoone|c0at yal p] eis rods ALe]vovd[o]us of adnOwol Aiyvrrios 
Sivavt[a]: edpapas dove, 7} | aAdXwv [dyr]o? (adrods) exe 


[ 550 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


Overs Te Kal oyHuas Ere Te Kal Col] Serxvver évavtia On | amo 
avaotpodys [mo]Nectuxns elvar aypoixovs A[i]yumtious. 

This edict of Caracalla is part of a letter addressed to the prefect 
of Egypt. Cassius Dio refers to the driving of foreigners out of 
Alexandria by Caracalla excepting only the merchants (77. 23). 
From the edict we learn that the terms were not as severe as the 
historian maintains. Dio finds the motive for this legislation in the 
hatred of the emperor and the extreme lawlessness of the city 
mob, but it is probable that the urban movement and the desertion 
of the leaseholds and farms by the peasants were the cause (¢f. 
no. 168; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 211 ff.). 


194. DE SEVERITATE MUNERUM 


(216 p. Chr.) 
BGU. 159; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 408. 
ees sae eel i COTO) TE TOU ICU es oe eit alniel i CLG CE a 
Ter See [Aayavoloméppov apt[aBa@|y Tpiwy ...Tom....d... 
ypau|ufat..... olvx« é&édeT0 wor. Mera &€ radra avaédo[ bévTo|s 


pov | eis On[woo]i[a]lv Aevtovpyiav Baputarny oveav arréot[y |p 
THs Kons || ob Suvopevos UroatHvat TO Bapos THs NevToOUpytas. 
Tod odv | Naprporatou Hyenovos Ovarepitov Adtov Kedevo[av]- 

vA \ > x / / > \ O/ 
to[s] amavtas tovs | éml Eévns SiatpeiBovtas eis tas idias 

, A 3 \ ) e / e\ > / 
KaTeroépyer Oat, katerohnrOop. | Ezrel ov 0 tovTov vids Adpnrtos 
Lawrnpiyos [élEnynrevoas tis adtis | modews erHrOev por 
exTpdoowv TO TpLTAODY Tov dpeEtropévou, || erudidmper Kal aE@ 
aKovcal “ou Tpos avTovs Kal TO doKovY cot Kerevonts | yevé- 
aOar. Avevtvyer. | A[dp]jru0s Llaxdous ws (érHv) v ovA(}) yovaTe 
dpistepat. | ....0v | (‘Erous) xd Adro[kpdtoplos Kaicapos 
Madpxov Avpynriov Yeounpov Avta@vetvou Ilap@txod || Meyiorou 
B[petavycxod Meylicrov Veppavi[xod Melyiorov EvceBods 
LeBaorod avy ta. 


From the Fayim. The severity of the liturgy imposed upon 
Pakysis was so great that he fled from the village. When Valerius 
Datus published his edict in 216 promising amnesty, Pakysis 
returned. He was immediately requested to forfeit threefold the 
cost of the liturgy which he had defaulted. This appears to have 


Lie. 5e5 Sa | 


La! 


uo 


or 


Io 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


been the legal penalty in Egypt and if so, it was much higher than 
in other. parts of the empire (cf. Cod. Th. 12. 1. 16). Since the 
penalty was exacted by an ex-official of the metropolis, it is probable 
that Pakysis had been nominated to a liturgy in the city, although it 
is possible that, after the reorganization of Severus, the municipal 
officials may have been authorized to enforce the performance of 
the liturgies in the villages of the nome. Wilcken points out that 
the petitioner states the cause of his flight as if it were the customary 
method of escape from the burdens of public service (cf. pp. 112 ff-5 
nos. 180, 186, 189, 190). 


195. EDICTUM CARACALLAE DE SENATORIBUS 
(213-217 p. Chr.) 

P. Oxy. 1406. 

Avtoxpatwp Kaicap M'adpxos Avpyrusos] | Seovnpos “Avta- 
vivo[s Tlap@txos Méyioros] | Bpetav(v)ixo[s Méytotos Teppave- 
Kos] | Méyeoros Elva ]eB[ns SeBacros] || Aéyes. | Kav Bovrevt2s 
Tov [wpvtavw % Bovreuv]|rnv tone } méur[nrale ........ 
-.+, | 0 wev Bovarle]luTns THs Bovreias almadra]|Eeras Kai eis 
atiuov yopav [katacty|||loeras. Ipoeré@n év BLaBvaAwvi(?)] | 
bro ot[olae Snuocia ér[dpyouv ap]|yovtos Avpnr(iov) ’AreEav- 
Sp[ov..... ]| amo “HXiou [a]orews 

From Oxyrhynchus. ‘This edict gives an interesting sidelight on 
the proceedings of the municipal councils in Egypt. It would seem 
that Severus had introduced municipal government before the 
Egyptians were ready for the responsibilities of it. The meetings of 
the town councils were marred by unseemly brawls and quarrels, 
and the emperor was forced to impose the serious penalty of exile 
on those members who forgot senatorial courtesy so far as to strike 
the presiding officer or a fellow-member. This document may 
throw some light on no. 181, ll. 39 ff, where the proceedings in 
a case of appeal are curiously interrupted by a charge of assault. 


196. EDICTUM AURELI SERENISCI, ctparnyod, DE CENSU 
(226 p. Chr.) 
P. Teb. 288; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 266. 
[Avp]jALos Lepnvickos o Kai ‘Epunatas [ot ]pa(rnyos) "Apou- 
(voi'rov) Oc(uicrov) [kal] Llor(éuwvos) wepidos. | Tlapay(y)éAreTae 


[. 552 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


Tots mpax[t oper Tod € (tous) Tov [ye ]wpy(dv) | Kal KANpovyoY 
emakorovOncar THe yewwouervne em’ al[y]aQots avapetpyoes TOU 
omopou Kal avaypdwacbas || racav thy éorappévny yhv év Te 
Tupa@t Kal adrows | y[éver]s Kai ta [dvdluata Tov Kata prow 
(ye)yewpyn|x[oT lov Snwoctwy yewpyav Kalb Kdrnp[o]v|yov mpds 
TO pndev érrl (arept)ypahne Tod iepwrdrov | tapuetov yevécOat 
UTO THY Naoypadwy || 7) TpayuaTiKOV, ws Tod KivdSdvoU Kal 
bpetv | [av]rois awa éxetvors Scoicovtos, édv te havye | [xe]xa- 
koupynpé|vo |v 1) ov Seovtas tremp| a |y| wévov, undeweras Tpopadews 
umety | UrroNevTropévns ert Ths amrautHcews || Evexev yvwpiopod* 
Kal THS pévTor yeu|[vlopéevns vd’ buav avaypadny tHv | tony 
émidore. | ("Erous) e Ad[toxpa]ropos Kaicapos Mdpxov | [Ad]- 
pnri[ov] Leounp[ov Are ]Eavdpov EvceBods|| Evtuxyots LeBacrov 
Meyeilp 0. 
1. 16. lege dvaypadys. 

From the Fayim. The instructions issued to the collectors of 
the taxes in kind by the strategus of the district show that these 
officials had also to make a record of the seed distributed and of the 
land sown by the tenants on the public lands and by the cleruchi. 
Furthermore the collectors, the Xaoypados, and rpaypartuxoi seem 
to share joint liability if the treasury suffers any loss. ‘The Xaoypadou 
are officials connected with the collection of the poll-tax. The 
mpayywatixot occur but rarely in the Egyptian records and their 
duties are usually in connection with the allotment of the tax in 
grain. Cf. P. Ryl. 85; P. Amh. 107, 108, 109. In P. Gress. 58 
the title is used as a general term for officials (a.p. 116). Oertel 
omits this group in his study of the liturgy. 


197. DE MUNERE DECAPROTORUM 
(post 242 p. Chr.) 


P. Oxy. 62, verso; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 278. 


....as (éxarovrap)x(os) éml xtna(ewr) | [Oe0(d)(?) T]irov 
Svpwr diade|[ yo] uévar otparnyiav yat(pey). | PEEalurhs NaBav 
pov Ta || [yplaupata mréurpov | [ro]ds KAnpovouous ’Arro[)]|- 
Awviov Tod Sexarpot[olv | THs Opwoceho Torapy(ias), | wa 
un ex THS ons apel|relas evédpa mepl tnv | euBornv yévntar. 


[55831 


- 


fe) 


5 


Io 


I 


n 


n 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


"Elreprya S€é eis totto tov | otatiwvdpiov adra | Kat Tovs 
Aourrovs Sexallarpwrous, iva duvn|Odpev, 60ev édv S(é)ne, | tHv 
éuBornv rrounoat | dia Taxous. (2nd H.) "Eppdcé ce ebyopau. 

From Oxyrhynchus. From this letter of the centurion in charge 
of the imperial estates we learn that the heirs of a decaprotus were 
liable for the obligations of the liturgy during the remainder of the 
term of the deceased. ‘This office was introduced into Egypt after 
the reorganization by Severus. ‘There were normally two for each 
toparchy. ‘There is some doubt as to whether they were members of 
the local senate or not (cf. Wilcken, Grundziige, 218; Kilo, 1, 
147 ff.; Jouguet, Vie munic. 366 ff.; Oertel, Die Liturgie, 211 ff; 
R.E. s.v.; P. Oxy. 1410), but they were apparently nominated by 
the senate. The liturgy, however, is not municipal but imperial 
(Jouguet, op. czt. 360), and in this respect it apparently differs from 
its counterpart in the rest of the empire. Grenfell is of the opinion 
that the office was usually held for five years (P. Oxy. 1410), and 
the evidence seems to support the view that the office was held for 
a number of years in the later period, but this was not because of 
the normal tenure of the liturgy. The edict of Magnius Rufus 
(P. Oxy. 1410) merely forbids reappointment, and there is no 
implication that the legal period of the liturgy was longer than a 
year. 

198. DE CESSIONE BONORUM EORUM 


QUI MUNERA DECLINANT 
(250 p. Chr.) 


C.P.R. 20; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 402. 


Col. 1 

[Avpnrcos ‘Epyodelros ‘Opiwvos coountevoas “Epuov roXews 
THS wEeyadns apyaias Kal Nautpas Kal ceuvotdrns | [AvpnrAiws 
Kvdaipwjove rau Kai Oeodorwt yupvalorlapynoavte Kat apycepa- 
tevoavtt Bovreutht Svadeyouévwt THY mpv|[Tavetay THS avT]is 
TOAEWS TOL TYULLWTAT[ WL] Yaiperv. DOalolas péev éerécteira THe 
kpatiorns Bovrne dia cod | [ra d1a Tod é]mictddpatos tod Tod 
vouov otpatnyov AupnXtov lépwvos dia Adpndiou ‘E[ p ]uo0d orpa- 
Tnytx[o]d || [vrnpérov alytiypadévta wot bd TOD NawTpoTdrou 
Huav yyewovos “Ammiov LaPetvou, mpos a HEi\[ouv wap] avrod 


PREY Sea 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


5 , , e » A , \ es 
éEcoTavomevos TavTwv ov exw Tols TpoBaropevots TOV NLETEPOV 
eN\ > / e / \ \ re A 3 nt Fi A 
viov | [Avpnrvov ‘Opiwlva tov cal “Eppaiov eis Koounretay THs 

sae pe / pe ks Vi ? , TN > a 
avTns TorEwS EO HY UTroyves | [éEeTEXcCoa Uirép | euavTod eEava- 
AwGets, de dv HOéANoEY Tov Kivduvoy THs mpoBorHs eivas Tpos | 
[rods dvoudoart as, Tov dé [Tr ]od vowod otpa(tn)yov Biav yewvo- 
pévnv KorDoaL, et yelvo[t]To Tapa Ta UT avTod || [cwrnpiws 
SunyopevO lévta, adrrep érrevyvextat axorovOas THe éxdoVELane pot 
bm Tov eis TOUTO émictarévr|[ Tos UanpéTou U]roypadye emt THS 
bl v]as Kat eixddos Tod dvtos pnvos Ereid. "Eyes 5é Aris Hv KB | 
[Emeid, é&ed00n wos] dia Bovrevt[e]cod tarnp(éryou ériotadpa 
cov Tod Evéaip[o]vos tod Kal Oeodorov avro|[mpocwrws avt- 
emlictarévt[ols epi tyls aldtas apyns pet Exotacw Kat 
mapapopicbévta éx TaV vopowr | [Kal] THs [broypaldn[s] ér- 
d[O]oves tiva SnAdoavtos KaTa TO avayKaiov. Kai vov avt- 
eTLATEAAW GOL, || ém[e]vd[7mep THL] exoTdy7[e] Kal Tov idol t]ov 
apictapévos UTapKer ek TOY vopwv Kal TOV Oeiwy SiaTal|[ Elewv 

, \ , , , ee , 
»+..-9.[..-Bo]nOeva TO pndeptay Biavy twacyev [olis apwofo- 

¢€ / e XN \ ye >) / 

pevos 0 ANaptrpoTatos Hryepov Kat |[«]aBocvo[ vu Jer[ os] HOEAncEeV 
[ro]v otpatnyoy Biav Kwdrdcat, Tpocbeis Tov Kivdvvoy THs 
A > \ \ > f b) \ »” \ 
mpoBorns eivas rept | [tov]s dvou[aloavtas. Ei 8 oles, od 
[av ]ros Ta mavra pov AaBe[v] avti Tod vevoyicpévov TpiTov Ta 

A > aA , , 5) , \ \ 
THe apxne [S]cadépovta | [wlavta alrlomAnpoces Kat [pu] 
évedpeverv py[[O]]te THY TOAW unde THY KpaTioTHY BovAnv. ’Ap- 
Keo On||[oo]uas yap Tatd[€] THs avTeTiL a |tadpare e[y] peyioTtwr 

, ished € , ¢ / , 
dixatopatt. Avpyrwos “Eppodiros ‘Opiwr[os] xoopntetcas | 
[eppadcb]ai oe evy[opu las, pirrare. | [(’Erous)] a’ Adroxpa[to]pos 
Kaicapos Tatov Meooiov Kvivtov Tpa:avod Aexiov EvaeBois 
Eitvyots XeBactod ‘Edeim xy. 


Col. 11 

Avpnrio. Ania LaBeivwt TOt NaTpoTdata@. Hyewoue | Tapa 
AvpnAiov ‘Eppodinrou ‘Opimvos cocuntevoartos ‘Eppod roXews 
THs peyarns apyaias | Kal Aapmpds Kal cewrlol|ratns. *Emi- 
otadpa Siccoyv ypahev br ewovd mpos Tov THY mpvTalvetav 
Siadexopevov Avpn[rA]vov Evdaipova tov cai Oeddorov yupvaci- 
apynoavta Bovrevtny || tov [a]lit(ov) “Ep(uorrort adv) mpos a 
avros a[vt]e[m]léorevrév wou avToTpocwTws povos TEpl KoopN- 


[ 555 ] 


To 


20 


Io 


15 


20 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


/ ’ A > / 3 / c Pie , ey > / 
telias | eis Nv @vopuacOn ov SedvTws Oo HuéTepos vids AUpndrtos 
e , ec Ae. a x oe 3 / ¢€ \ BI n 
Opiov o Kat ‘Eppatos wel” iv é&elréxeoa brép éuavtovd mpo- 
té[plav dtroyias POdcavros pou émiaretAavTOS THe KpatioTnt | 
Bovane db adtod ta avriuypadévta pot vTd TOD NapTpoTaTou 
e / A Le] / \ 3 > “4 / 3 
HryEeu“ovos cov TOD SeatréTov | dynradn [e]E aEvdoeds pou pelt 
éxoTacews TAVT@Y, TOY UTapYoVT@Y fou Tpos THY avo||wov 
ovopaciav Kat un Sel[yo]uévov avTa ws Tepléyer aTroTiOeuat ev 
Tae évtav0a | YeBacteiws rapa Tots ei[y]verr Tod Kupiov nuav 
kat Geoptrectatov Avtoxpatopos | Tatov Meco[i]ov Kvivrov 
Tpaavod Aexiov EvaeBods Evtuyots YeBactod Kai “Epevvias | 
Kourpeconvas ‘Etpovoxidras XeBaotis awa Tae TH’ wapTu- 

/ \ \ \ \ \ , / 3 f 
poTroinate Tpos TO undev | TO Tov wéyeOos NavOdvew, acparsfo- 
pevos THY Tept eue hpovpav dia varnpérov Bovdreu||TLKod Kal 
pvUNAKOS THS TpUTaveElas ETL ATO EiKaOOS TOD dvTOS uHVvos Emel 
Tapa Ta | Ud cod cwTnplws Sinyopevpéva, durAaccopévey poe 

@e + id / v ‘ 3 / / 

dv éyw tavtTolwy dix Jail|wv. | ("Erous) a’ Adtoxparopos Katcapos 
Taiov Mecciov Kvivtou Tpavavod Aexiov EvceBots Evtuyods | 
LeBactod “Evelh xy. Atvpnarsos “Eppodiros ‘Opiwvos Kxoopn- 
Tevoas amrebéuny || os mpoxertac. | (2nd H.) A(vpnAos) “Hpwdiev 
+ yA ” /93 \ — / Ni 3 / 

éxyov icov. ("Erous) a ’Erveidh xy. Tovtayv ta ica arédov. 

From Hermopolis. The petition of Hermophilus is most im- 
portant for the study of municipal administration in Egypt after 
the reforms of Severus. Hermophilus had recently held the office 
of cosmete and claims to have been almost ruined by the expenses 
attached to this magistracy. Hisson was now nominated for the same 
office without his father’s consent and Hermophilus appealed to the 
prefect offering to cede all his property to the nominators according 
to the law. The prefect accepted his proposal and sent instructions 
accordingly to the strategus that Hermophilus should not suffer loss 
of citizenship or corporal restraint (cf. no. 185). This acceptance had 
been forwarded by Hermophilus to the civic council and he had 
surrendered his property according to law. ‘The council, however, 
was apparently free to accept or reject the proposal and it proceeded 
to order the arrest of Hermophilus in order to compel him to accept 
the liability for his son’s proper performance of the magistracy. 
‘Thereupon Hermophilus writes to the prytanis or presiding officer 
of the council offering the whole of his income, without reserving 


[ 556 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


the customary third, to the prytanis if the latter will relieve him 
from the burden of undertaking the magistracy on behalf of his 
son, and will administer his estate on behalf of the liturgy. From 
this it is probable that the nomination had been made by the 
prytanis, though this inference is not absolutely necessary. In the 
second column Hermophilus lodges a copy of the correspondence 
in the shrine of the Augusti and appeals again to the prefect. In 
this case he characterizes the nomination as illegal although there 
is no implication of this charge in his previous correspondence. 
It is assumed that Horion was a senator although he is not de- 
signated by any official title in the petition. However, it is probable, 
although not certain, that only members of the council could be 
nominated to magistracies (¢f. pp. 89f.). The illegality may 
rest in the nomination to office of members in the same family 
without due regard to the law of vacatzo (cf. no. 177 and p. 88). 

‘The law whereby two-thirds of the revenues of a surrendered 
estate were appropriated for the liturgy which the owner had refused 
to accept, and one-third was reserved for the use of the owner by 
the nominator or nominators who administered the estate for the 
benefit of the liturgy which they were compelled to undertake, is 
unknown elsewhere. Mitteis has brought together all the evidence 
which bears on this problem in his excellent commentary on the 
legal aspects of this petition (C.P.R. 20), although Grenfell has 
cast some doubt on his interpretation of the document (P. Oxy. 
1405). Cf. pp. 89 f,, nos. 181, 185; P. Ry/. 77 notes; Hermes, 
32 (1897), 651 ffs 55 (1920), 21 ff 


199. DE TRAPEZITIS OXYRHYNCHI 
(260 p. Chr.) 

P. Oxy. 1411. 

Avpyrzos [Itorepaios 6 cal Neweotavos,| ctparnyos ’Ofupuy- 
yeltov. Tay dnpociwr eis | ev cvvaxyOévtwr Kai attiacapévor | 
TOvS TOV KOAAUBLaTiKoY TpaTrelav || TpameleiTas MS TaUTAS 5 
amokreroayv|t[o lv Tat wn BovrNec Oat tpoc((c))ierOat | TO Oetov 
TOV YeBactav vouropa, alvay]|kn yeyévntac tapayyéApate 
m[apay||yernvas traces Tots TAS TpaT elas KeKT[ ME |||vL0r]s TaVTAS 10 
avotéarxaiTal[n]|v[[m]]vope|o[wlampocier barry parto[Ta]| 


Bee Geode 


15 


20 


170 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


Tapatvmouv Kal KiBdnrov Kal Katak[eppa]|rifewv, ov povots dé 
avtois adda [Tols] | cal dvtwa 82 tTpdrov tas cvva[dXa]||yas 
Tovoupévois, yewv@oKovat[v] | @s, ef un TrecOapynovay THe tHe 
map|layyeAiar, werpadnoovtar wv Td [pé]|yeO0s THs Hyepovias 
Kal éte dvol ev] | ea’ adrots [[T0 we] ]ye[[P0c]]véo Oar mpfoc]|lé- 
takev. “Konuevwoapnv. “Etouls mrpe]|tolv] "Advp[[e]] dydon 
K[[ev]]ai evxds. 
1. 5. lege dmoxXeioartas. 

From Oxyrhynchus. The officials of the city accused the bankers 
of the city, who dealt in exchange, of closing their doors and re- 
fusing to accept the new imperial coinage. The strategus ordered the 
banks to open and to accept and exchange all coin except the 
spurious and counterfeit on the pain of suffering the penalties already 
prescribed in the past by the prefect for similar acts. For the banking 
problem in Roman Egypt, cf. Preisigke, Gzrowesen. ‘The importance 
of this document lies in its value in the economic history of the 
period rather than in its bearing on municipal institutions. The 
depreciation of the currency by successive emperors was apparently 
accompanied by laws compelling banks under state control to 
accept the new issue at the same value as the old, or at a value fixed 
above its real worth. Accordingly when a new issue came into 
circulation there was a rush to exchange it for the older and purer 
coinage. The banks of exchange would close their doors or refuse 
to part with their reserves, but they were again and again compelled 
to open and exchange money by the edicts of the prefects. Cf. 
NOSTOL Mt ee: 


200. DE NOMINATIONE EORUM QUI MUNERA SUBEUNT 
(265 p. Chr.) 


P. Fior. 2, vu, ll. 166-201; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 401. 


(4th H.) [Bravos [la]vilox]os 0 cat Ad[yyo]s otpa(rnyos) 
“Epporron(eérov). | [Tod d00év]ro[s] woe mpoolayy]éXpuatos vie 
copapxav | [kopuns Ev]ced da tov Xnio[ ToT |tactav eiod.d6v|- 
[rev] tovs dv avrod éy[yeylpaupévous ets tyyv || [av]0 éavtadr 
copapytav [ic]ov dnuociat | [rploxertar, va Twavtes e[id]acr 
kal of eicay |yerévtes Exwvtar Tov [éyxer]prcOévTwy adTois | 


[ 558 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


byla@s Kal miotas eis TO élv pndlevi pweud[OA]vac. | (5th H.) 
"Eonpe[wod]unr. || 
(4th H.) ("Erous) 08’ rod Kupiov jpyav Tar[Ac]nvod SeBacrod | 
"Exret ¥. | 

(1st H.) Dravior Lavicnwt tat nat Adyywu [or ]patnyau 
‘Epporrovcitov | m[apa] Avpnriwv Tupavvov ‘“Eppua[mo]AAwvos 
kat IlaQwrov|....... aupotépwy kopapyalv Kklouns “Kvoed 
de nuor, || Av[ py ]Atwy TloAX@vos Habaltou x Jal’ OQpov ‘Atphtos 
audoté|pav AnictoTiacTOV [Kali Tov [NouT]Ov Ov Hudv TaV 
mal|povtav. Aidouev cal mpocalyy]éAXopev tods troye|ypap- 
pévous Kopapyas, edb ae aldtlovs avTiralPécP lat ths | ypetas 
amo onuepov, Hts éativ [y T]od “Eeih told évert dros || +P" 
(érous), Ovtas evrropous Kai émi[ rn |deious Kivdv[ voc judv | Kab 
TavToY TOV KaTapevor[t lov év THe avTHe Kwo|une €E adrNrEY- 
yuns, ods Kal nulet|s eryyvemeba. Hic 8é. | Wafous Korrotfov 
pnt(pos) ...-ns | ws (éT@v) pe’, wopfov ély(wv) (Spayuav 
dioxtrALov) || Lorduwv Wanovos unt[pos..... |novos | as (err) 
Ne’, roplov é]y(wv) (Spaypav dvoxirALwv). | Avevt[vyer]. | (’Erous) 
uB’ Avtoxpatopos Kaicap[os Tovumrnijou Acciwviov | Parrdenvod 
Teppavixod Meyior[ov Evoe|S[ovs Evru]yots || SeBacrod 
"Erelg xy’. (and H.) O¢ w[poxetwevor xwludpyar | dv judy tov 
mapovtlwv AniotoTrial|oTa(v) | émidedm@xapev. A[vdprrLos.... 
....|.. Jos éypawa trép avt(@v) [ypdupata pn eiddotor] |. 
(3rd H.?) “Eonp(erwoapny). || (6th H.) Tépavv[os tarnpérns Snpo- 
ciat Tpobeis Ka|te|yx@p(toa). 

From Hermopolites. This document is important for the history 
of the liturgy of the comarch. ‘This official replaced the village-elders 
in the control of the affairs of the village after the municipal re- 
organization. “There were usually two in each village and they 
were nominated by their predecessors in office. It is noteworthy 
that, in this period, not only the nominators, but also the citizens 
and the residents of the village were bound as sureties for the proper 
fulfilment of the liturgy (cf. Wilcken, /oc. cit. note on 1. 186; Oertel, 
Die Liturgie, 153 ff-; nos. 171, 196; pp. 99 ff). The epistra- 
tegus had no longer any connection with the appointment of 
officials in the villages as this document was issued by the strategus 
(cf. Wilcken, Grundziige, 349). 


[559 J 


80 


La] 


185 


Lan) 


gO 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


201. DE CONDUCTIONE AGRORUM PUBLICORUM 
(266 p. Chr.) 


C.P.H. 119, recto, col. vir; C.P.R. 39; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 


S77: 

[T]he xpatiorns Bovarge Eppodtoreas ts weyarns]| apxatas 
Kat NapTpds Kal ceuvorat[yns dsa Avpnariov] | Kopedriouv 
"Ad2€avdpou iameKod aro otplatiay] | yunvacrapyou BovrcuTod 
évapyou mpuTavews || THS avTHs TodEews Kal @s xXpnuariter | 
[wraloa Avpnartov Meveraov Ilacyewodtos pntpos | ’Eyedros 
amo Kouns OerxBovbews. Bovropar | [é]eovoiws pwicbacacbar 
éx tod m[o]AectiKoD Aoyou | ert xpovoyv érn Téccapa amo TOD 
éveat@tos 16 (érovs) || mepl tHv alv]rnv OerBavOw éx Tod 
Diroxpartous | KAnpov apovpas &E eis (o)Topav wupod Kal ava- 
Tau|M“aTiK@V yeva@v KaT ETOS KaTa TO HuLov, éxpopilov Kal 
dopou Kat eros amrora[K]tov TALy OrAwr] | dpovpav wupod apta- 
Bav déxa oKT® Kal apyul||piov Spaxyav éBdounKovta Svo, as 
arobece | Kal wetpiow ev Tot Lladvi Kal Eel pnat car eros, | 
TO pev apyvptloly Soxcpuov, Tov dé mupov eis TO bn|uooLov TpwTNE 
petpnoe pialv] Soxinds avtt | pods “AOnvaiov kal *roicw 
péetpnow KalO]apay eis TO || ..actadjvat, Tov Onwocioy wavTwV 
THs ys | Kal émipeplopev OvTwY TpPOS TOV THs TOAEwS | NOYyoV. 
"Eav &€ 6 un) yelvorto aBpoyos yévntas aro To[d] | éEAs érov[s], 
érravay Kes érmavtAno@ K[al] TeXéow | TOY TpoKEmévov hopwv 
TO Hucov, émlGai||watos dé yewwouévou é£ov éErépows weTaptcOody | 
} kal adtoupy[ily Kai érepwt(ndeis) @por(oynoa.) ("Erous) 16’ 
Avtoxpatopo[s] | Kaicapos Iovmdiov Acewviov Tarrdinvod | 
Teppavixod Meyiorou [epatxod Meyictov KiceBods | Evtuxods 
Yel[Slacrov Xoiax yx’. || [A(p7Acos)] Mevéralos Hacyevodr]os 
pepicOwpat ws mpox(ertar). | A(dpdAcos) Korpi[s éyp(avra) 
i(mép) avt(od) w]7 €t5(oTos) yp(auparta). 

From Hermopolis. ‘This document gives the terms of a lease of 
the public lands of the city from the municipal council for a term 
of four years. The rental is paid partly in kind, partly in money. 
It is noteworthy that the lessee states that his contract is voluntary 
on his part, implying that compulsory leaseholds were not unknown 
at this period. In case of lack of water in any season the lessee pays 


[ 560 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


half the stipulated rental, but in case the city receives a better offer 
for the lease of the land during the term of the leasehold, it has the 
right to cancel the lease. From this document it is apparent that 
the municipality now controlled a certain amount of land in the 
nome, and it is probable that Severus transferred some if not all 
of the state lands in the nome to the municipality when he instituted 
the new organization (cf. pp. 29 f.; Wilcken, Grundziige, 308). 


202. EPISTULA SENATUS HERMOPOLITANI AD otpatnyov 
(266-267 p. Chr.) 


C.P.H. 52; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 38. 
[‘Eppod morews THs peyaddns| apyaias [kal Naptpordrns] | 


[kal cepvoratns 7 Kpatiotn Bov]dA2 Auv[pnrios|....... sp orevaterane 
otplarnyer “Epuloronitov | rae pirtalrax [xaipes: ||....... 
ty ea FOR TOUM KU OLOU ss ac. 214d ase nee ae 
MELO LAN OIMOT Bal ci ite /a\cl oin\ omer. harem y mépos Tov ap[..... 
Meer stern Le oes Ho |poroyias: Kav wie elds « u- Bee ey Sib. 
epouv tavTns éyd[......-- [RSs ee Woes oy 0 Aapl|rporaTos 
TVEILO Peters \a.e « Petie e nae eo |raypa Grete wey is bs | 
Be WAY ae Kal SexatrpwmTov @s emlyelpno...........]...0. 
eat sts amawt[el|y To vromelm@Toy TpiTov wépos ......|.pas 


avayKkaias andi dpucba (xatapuyeiv) pos TO wéyeOo[s] || avTod 
[a]Ecodvtes mapadeyOjvar jpiv ta ply] | dedvTws amnutnpéva 
eis GAXa Hudy ohrAnpa|ta Kai [miloTevopev Kata THY éwhuToV 
b) fa) \ \ (4 / , \ \ \ val 
avtov | pos Tolvs va]|nxoous diravOpwriav Kal mpos Ta Oei[a] | 
evoéBe[tav] émuvevoesy Thu Senoes TOV Kowvod Auer || cuvedpiov. 
> \ \ ? lal 2 \ \ 3 VA / \ 
Ezrevd7) Sé avayxaiov jv be Kal oé émiotéA|NeoOar Kato Kal 
amTorxnt TovavTns | elo pakews, iy mapa Ta Oeiws Sinyopevpéva. | 
yetvoméevnv éueuato n weyanreLorns ToD | NawmpoTaTou nryELovos, 
axonrovdws tois év a||utv doEaciw éemictéAdopev coe €[id]oTe ws 
> \ ] Ul > / / > / / 
ov|devi axivdvvov Avtoxparopav yapite | [a]vti[ Br ]érrevy, Noyou 
duraccopuévolu T]ju more. | Kat The BovArne mept od exovar 
qmavtTos Sixatov: || axoN(ovOws) Tots év nu(iv) d0&(act) émiarér- 
[Nopév] coe adta tad|Ta, tv’ evdtjus K(al) m(epi)metvns tov (Hs) 
Hry(ewovias) dpov | as ovdevy axivduvvoy avToxpaTopiKas yapt|Te 
[avte]8rérresv. | ('Erovs) 16’ [Av]toxpdropos Kaicapos Tov- 


AMA [pROiN 36 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


35 maAéov || Acwviov Tardunvod Teppavixod Meyiorou | Hepotxot 
Meyictov KiceBots Kvtuxots LeSdotou 


1. 14. karapvyety supplied by Wilcken. 

LE2O. ‘Exedy oy corrected by scribe to ‘Ered dé: nv Kal to nv d€ Kal. 
Lets Kar’ e.d0 KaTw corrected by scribe to KaTw. 
] 
] 





. 29. Kal peivyis Tov THS Hyemovias dpov erased by scribe. 

. 30. e€iddre Ta corrected by scribe to atvra ravra. 

From Hermopolis. Unfortunately this piece of papyrus is very 
fragmentary and its meaning can only be made out in part. It is 
evident, however, that the city was heavily in arrears in its quota 
of tribute, and the senators appealed to the prefect to have certain 
sums illegally exacted credited to their indebtedness. The strategus 
had paid no heed to their protests and had continued his exactions 
in spite of the law—apparently an edict which forbade the strategus 
to collect arrears by confiscation or by fines until appeals were 
decided. The senate hereby warns the strategus to desist until the 
prefect visits Hermopolis on his next judicial circuit. 


203. ACTA SENATUS OXYRHYNCHI 
(270-275 p. Chr.) 
P. Oxy. 1412. 


bat n kal pndicpa avTa@t éri TOVTOLS yLveTOw Els HuLY@pLOV 
THM TRS eit vd..... | «..+-as 6€ elonyodua. Lemripsos 
Lephvos o xal loyupiov éEnyntns ei[m(ev)]........ Perens 


ates kat w[....|...émrl tov]rous Tots Spots. Oi Bovreutat 
3 > 7 >| / € 4 Sd \ a a 
eim(ov): wxeavé, €Enynta. | [o mpvtavis eiev* TO peya]diov Tov 
Kupiou nuav Avpnrtavod jeBactov. Ovopacate ody kai Bourev- 
5 Tas Wa Ta OTETTLKA AUTOY Elo[....... || o¢ BouNevtat eizrov* 
» +a |t.O rpvtavs eir(ev): rpotpéacbe ot éEnyntai Tivas. Of 

b \ 2 / na > > / € / 
éEnynrtat eim(ov)* mpotpamnte [Xlepjvos eis eEnynteiav. ‘O mpv- 
TAVLS ei (ev) . Whos . 2a]Beivos Kal @S xpnpa(riger) TpuTaveb- 
aas eimr(ev)* o Tue TLV OTETTLKOD ETL OetrEL 5 aVEdéEATO ATO 
timav éEnynretas. ‘O mpuvt[avs | eim(ev): .... y]paupareds 

A 3 , ’ \ € \ / > \ 
TodeiTiKwy eiT(ev)* val. “lovAtavos 0 kai Atooxoupidns éEnyntis 
elir(ev)* Ildoutiwv odeiree oremti[Kov], oveovy [...|... O¢ 

er: a) yes A 7 f > s 
Bovreut lai eim(ov): 0 dvopacbels eri Tt dims TOpwL @voudo On. 
Lemrripustos Avoyévyns 6 kal’ Ayabos Aaiuwv yevomevos vroprnua- 
, \ id / / Ss 

toyp[a]gos cat .... |... [ds xpnmar(ifer) ovvdixos eim(ev) 


[ 562 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


> a ae d ? b / € 4 > / 
ephvo(?)]|s orev yupvaciapxos. ‘O mpvtavis eim(ev)* ovopacate 
A —/ xX \ >? \ an Cis \ s 
GdXous, va Kav TO eEnyntixoy avaotabHe. Oi éEnynrat eizm(or): 
mpotpatntw "lwy vids ...||..++ [els tHv eEnyntetlav tod ar- 
mov. Lexovvdos Yexovvdou apyrepevs eim(ev)* earitnpcicOw ovv 
6 ovopacbels. ‘O mpvtams eim(ev)* aipotmas eis émoty|[pnow 
wee ese Didéay cai] Wrovuteivoy iva tiv wictiw aroTAnp@ecwo. 
A A ¢ \ 3 e \ \ / e \ \ 
THe BovrAne. Ov Bovrevtat cim(ov)* ayve micté Diréa, ayvé rice 
T1ho[v]tetve. Todtwy[..|... tareprePévrwvr eis rnv] EERs Bovarny,o 
mpvtavis eim(ev)* Kal ai dAXaL apxYalovouacdtwcav. Ovoydcate 
dé xai Bovrevtas. Oi aro tHs TpiTys pudr‘s elr(ov):....|...[O 
mpvtavis eim(ev): ére|tnpnoes Netdos Bovrevtys. Oi Bovrevtal 
eim(ov)* ayve mioté NeiXe, ael cadrws Netros, BonOeav avtau. 
Of aro thls Tlpitns purr[s | elm(ov)> Lemripos Aroyévns 6 kab 
"Ayabos Aaipov yevouevos UTouvnpatoypaddos Kai os Ypnpua- 
(rife) cdvdiKos elrr(ev)* ...]xaTeiknpa Topov, TouTécTiV yevn- 
para aroKetpeva év TOL Movimou, Kat dtav yywoOhs 4 TocoTns, 
mapate[O]noetas vuily. ... || ....]pos cal os ypnua(rifer) 
eimr(ev)* Scot viv mvopacOncay Vro Pedéov kal “Hpaxrdi@vos 
@voudcOncav. Oi Bovrevt[al]i eim(ov): amo Odrys .... | [rhs 
purjs(?).... ayve mua|re ‘Opiwv yeovyav év Necpeipi, ayve 
\ , A ? / ¢ \ \ 7 
mucte Aewvidn yeovxav ev Awotléov, ayve tiaté Bylolapiov 
A > > , A J ig x "A 6a , 
yeou|[yav év......+. Lemripsos Aroyerns o kat Ayabos Aaipwv 
yevomevos vTrouynwatoypdgos Kat ws Ylpnua(tifer) cbvduKos 
elmr(ev)* Wa Tpotpdtwcw Kai apywow ot dvopalouevot, TO 
TPWTEVLAUTOV THS MeToupynatals eooee @ eosoeeenee | oee ese eve 
Ilrovcuatos yupvaciapyos cim(ev)* ......- eis TH[v Tpra]xdda 
tod Meaopy xpetoar. Thu mev Tpraxads ovK éxpetcer, AdArd THL 
Cen V4 5 aa a 5 
éEAs veounviar dv ewod él y perce |v, rapadey[.......,||B.....+]s 
6 Tov Pirocddov, y émeatates Meodwpos vids Uroreuaiov Kal 
ox éypetcev, GAN’ eyo &x mpoypetas [éypecla. “Edy odp 
e \ + > \ a > \ 
[.....|-...+ 06 Bovrevtai eim(ov):] @xeave IItorcuaie, oxeave 
7 , ¢ ‘9 , > 7 ¢ 
yupvaciapye. wa Avoviatos o kai Apteuiowpos, 18 Apiotiwv 6 
NY HES / 7A f / 
kat ’Avd[pover]xos “Ac[u]yxpi[rou....|...... yuuvaciapyos 
eim(ev)’ ...] 4 evadrAayh Tov nwepav. Oi Bovrevtai eiz(ov): 
4 \ / =| \ \ e / 
Kupia Ta Wndiopata. wy Fievikos Kal ot wédAovTes yuulvace- 
Apel, s.s0a|ssecesee] Lephvos ’Awpoviov yupvaciapyos 
\ / > na 
elir(ev)* ny BXaTrTéeTH mov TOWHdio wa 7 evarrAayy Ths 7[u]é[pas 


[503 ic] 36-2 








Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


35 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


see ceeceeceelenceee Gb] Kal py expevcer. Kn Yeounpos Kal 
"Exipayos ot tod Pidocddov. Ot Bovdevtai elm(ov)* wxelavé 
Lephve, @keave yupvaciapye ...-..||-... 6 MpvTavis elm(ev): 
1.2] 0 reieTns ypuoot otepdvov Kai veikns Tod Kuptov MeV 
Atpadtavod LeB(aor)od “lo[vvAr........ | ...... TOU Kupiov 
nov Atpynralvod LeBactod Kat btt Kai 0 crépavos avrod Hd 
éyéveTo, Kal Eb fut) Ob TeyvetTar [.............|...7a TKJEUN 
TadTa Kat evyny yeivetar. “Adda Swdexa TaravTa S0OnTw Tots 
Texvelta[i|s .....-. |...... O&€ Bovrevral efr(ov): of adtol 
amaiteitwcav. BOéwv o kal “Opuyévns X[arpyjpyor(?)]os Kat ws 
t > Ve > x > 
yp[nwa(rifer) eim(ev)* ........|..... StvJacde adtods ama- 
Tica. Oi Bovrevtat eitr(ov)* ayvoi mictol atrattyntai. Kvrrop[os] 
o Kat Ayal@os Aaiwwr kal os ypnua(rifer) eim(ev):....||... ]var, 
éav [ 17; x, On ASS, ‘Oo re 5 ‘ \ ¢ / 
j]1) TeAXeLWOHL TO Epyov. mpuTaves eim(ev)* Kal 0 KpaTi- 
b] / # ¢ \. 39 \ 
a[tos] émeotparnyos O[....|......~. Evsropos 0 Kat Avalos 
Aaipayv Kxjai es ypnua(rifer) eim(ev) Stav obv evOéws édXOnt, 
érrevyOnoetar t[O élpyov. Ot Bovre[utal e]i[m(ov): ........| 
BA > / + ig , € \ 
...+.]te Evzrope, evdsotxnre Kirrope. Yemripsos Avoyévns o kal 
"Ayabos Aaipwv yevoulevos b7rouvnwatoypadgos | cal os xpnua- 
(riGer) cuvdsxos eir(ev)* el TL TOL]s TeyveiTats ev TigTL avaXri- 
oKeTat, TapateOnoetar viv. | ..... ['O mpvtavs eim(ev): 
wees. .] TOV HV Kal eTETTAAN TOTE TO KOLVOV TAY KoouNTL av dia 
K]opynAcavod cat Uavoar[iov.......||.....~ Jos dedn[A@xév]ar 
mpl av. To wav avdropa Oob[je.......- |] MaEmov ev... d[.. 
wrfeseseecesee AbTOUPY(!)|nolay..... €ws Tod Tlayava.... 
Se) Sin 2 we BO so» e€¢e © @ 8 & 6,86 TOU> e@e3reft @ e@ @ e Oo e S aiTnow 2..e Re 6 167 @ ° 











From Oxyrhynchus. This record of the proceedings in the senate 
at Oxyrhynchus was written on an unusually broad sheet of papyrus. 
More than eighty letters have been lost from the beginning of the 
lines, and the part of the document still preserved can be interpreted 
only in part. Sufficient remains, however, to give valuable. in- 
formation in regard to the organization of the senate, the procedure 
in appointment to magistracies and liturgies, and details in regard 
to municipal administration. The first three lines give the con- 
clusion of a discussion about filling an official post, probably that 
of exegetes. The prytanis apparently brings the proposal before the 
senate in each case. In ll. 4-18 the topic is the appointment of 


[ 564 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


municipal magistrates, particularly the exegetae and their ézrurn- 
pntat. The latter are evidently official guardians of the officials 
elected, and apparently the senators are more interested in them 
than in the nominees to office. The relations of these guardians or 
supervisors to the exegetae are uncertain. They may have ad- 
ministered the duties of the office while the exegetae provided the 
funds, but it is more probable that they were responsible in some 
way for the person of the candidate, and were appointed to prevent 
his flight or avoidance of the liturgy and its obligations, Supervisors 
of gymnasiarchs (P. Oxy. 471) and of the office of agoranomus 
(Oertel, Die Liturgie, 239 f.) are also known, and the latter some- 
times replaces the agoranomus (P. Oxy. 1413, 1. 10 note). The 
relation of the magistrate, his supervisor, and his nominators be- 
comes a complicated problem which cannot be solved with the 
scanty evidence available. In |. 4 the prytanis opened the debate 
with a reference to honoring the emperor by the nomination of 
senators to magistracies in order that their payments for crowns of 
office should be available for the state. Evidently, at this period, 
only senators were available for magistracies (cf. pp. 89 f). The 
exegetae were asked to nominate candidates to succeed themselves 
or possibly to fill a vacancy in the college. They suggested a certain 
Serenus (?) for the post. The remarks of the prytanis, probably a 
request for more names, are lost. Sabinus now called attention to 
the fact that Plution had not paid his fee for the crown on entering 
the college of exegetae. This statement was confirmed by the 
secretary of the municipal treasury and the debate was continued, 
probably with a warning that the precedent should not be followed 
by Serenus. The senators made the statement that the nominee 
(Plution or Serenus) was named on the security of his own property. 
The syndic then apparently closed the discussion about Serenus 
with a remark of which the point 1s obscure, but which perhaps 
implied that Serenus was ineligible because he already held the post 
of gymnasiarch. The exegetae then nominated Ion and, on the 
proposal of the chief-priest, Phileas and Plutinus were named as 
Ion’s supervisors. Next comes a reference to business, probably 
concerning the supervisors, which is deferred to the next meeting. 
The prytanis then calls upon the other colleges to make nominations 


[ 565 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


for office, and he also asks for nominations to the senate. The third 
tribe, whose turn it was, apparently, to make nominations for litur- 
gies during the following year (cf. no. 191; Jouguet, Vie munic. 
410 f.), now made a nomination for some office and the prytanis 
named a supervisor. In this case only one supervisor is named, 
and the office must be different from that to which Ion was 
nominated, as two éwutnpnrat were named for the exegetes. The 
third tribe then made another nomination, but the syndic intervened 
explaining that he had impounded the property of some individual 
(probably the person whose name had just been mentioned) and 
would report on its value later. ‘The meaning of Il. 15-17 is obscure, 
Grenfell thinks that objection was made to the previous nomination 
because only two names supported it. This was followed by the 
selection of candidates on the nomination of the senate collectively, 
and chosen from the whole body of the tribe or of the senate. The 
debate concluded with some remarks concerning the first year of 
their liturgy. This may imply that liturgies were now held for a 
longer term than one year which has hitherto been regarded as the 
normal tenure of office. In Il. 19-24 we find some new information 
about the gymnasiarchs. ‘They took turns in providing the oil, each 
furnishing the requisite amount for one day. The gymnasiarchs- 
elect also were required to share this burden, but in a body, not 
singly. From P. Oxy. 1418 (a.p. 247) we learn further that the 
office was often held for longer terms than a year, although the 
incumbent may have only been called upon to serve for short periods 
of a few days each time. In Il. 25 ff: the debate deals with the 
preparation of a gold crown due from the city, and the method of 
raising money to pay for it. 


204. ACTA SENATUS OXYRHYNCHI 
(270-275 p. Chr.) 


P. Oxy, 1414. 
Poticn?, d]pire[ta]e [x]at rdd[alvta dexatéooapa. “H timr) trav 
po[te]yla]piwy tddavta éxatov reccap[dxovta|....... Jaréxo 


\ , a a > \ / a / aA v4 

Ta Stadépovta THL vouml eis TO Mépos THS TWorEwS FE Hutcor. 
Myviatot arrodobvas éx ris dias arraiteicOwcay é[rrd nusov. . | 
-.+.)yiSerar. |....[O mptravs eim(ev): tH]v Tod lepod 


[ 566 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


yead|y]y xLatlecxéyacbat cal dpov Sed@xate kal érectandn(v) 


\ , e n nn A > \ e€ A \ \ 
Ta do-avTa vpely THL OTPATNYOL, ANNA [ot lepers py ||.....TOVS 
TO Ep}yov TovTO meTayerptcapéevous poe tals] yuvaixas avToy 
Svvac Gat kXwOeLv TO Neivoy TpoeBadovTO..|....+...0....0TWS 


\ \ rn (v4 A ’ 7 st An Ve >] a +3 fa! 
Kal Tepl TOUTO Gpov SHTE* OALye yap K@[pwal]i elowv al ev TaL 
A e A an \ 9 ” e \ + 
VOMOL ULOV TODTO TO Eldos Eyovow. Oi Bov[A]e[vTat eiz(or)- 
, / ¢ N43 \ / 
ius OD epe alee Jvat. Lemripsos Avoyévns o Kxat ‘Ayabds Aaipwv 
yevomevos UTouvnuatoypados Kat ws ypnpa(tifer) cuvv[ dios 


elmr(ev)* of Auvéutropou(?)..|...... Joa kal é[K] TexoapdKcovta 

évvéa Snvapiwv eivat TO Neivoyv TO oTHMoVLKOD, Evdexa Se Snvapla 
> a > / > \ Le) fa) / / 

avtois éEwdidcOn am[o Tod Tayutaxod Aoyou | ....ylevécOar. 


[Oc Bolureutai eim(ov): [de]xaevvéa Snvapiows apxeicOwoav ot 
NetvevTropou((s)) peta TO €Ewdial[o]uevov amd Tod talu]i[axod 
AOyou, Lemripsos Atoyévns o kal ’Ayalos Aaipay yevopevos || 
vVropuynuatoypa|pos Kai ws Kpnua(rifes) avvdixos eim(ev)* ec 
TovTo vplily [é]oo€ev emt tod otnpovixod, Telpay mMpocEveyKov- 
\ al / e f Ve / ¢e 
plelv cai tots wédrrovarly bdaive |..... ] ta€atwoay tiva ot 
ALvoUor of wéANOVTES Vpaivery THY OOdvNY TOU Lepod ava..,.| 
> re > , rn A 7 oh \ 
...[avayvadbetons a€jtocews TA[v TH]s TOAEwS ALVOU'Pwr TreEph 
TOD weTa TAS Trépvow eEodiaceicay avTtots [viép...dpayuas 
SoOjvat GrAXras Spaxuas |.......dc]a [TH]v TrAEoTiiay [TA]v 
elO@v Kal THY TACOMLGOLaY TOV UTOUpy| av, weTAa THY aVayVacL 
6 m[pvtaus eitr(ev)* SoOntwcap Tots ALwvoigols draL Spaxpat | 
...Kolvta ets [o]luvmAnpwciw spaxpav diaxociwy dia THY 
TrEoTiiav ToYV Eldav. TodTo WndlicacGe || ...cuvte]Tywnpévou 
Tov KplKov Kal avUTaL TpooyevécOwoar. Oi TENOdYTES THY TLLHVY 
a / ? / CAL a CRA n 
rod [Aivov(?) | .......]a[a]pareOjoerar vyiv tie ERs Bourn. 
Oi Bovrevtal eiir(ov): oftw. | .......[avay]vaabévtos émuttan- 
patos Tepevtiov Apiov otpa(rnyod) Trepi Tov aipeOhvat exal....| 
edofev vrepteOHva|e[elis rv éEAs BovAny. | ...[avayvwobévtos 
émiotd|Apmatos tlov] oTpatnyov repli alipécews AdAXo[Y KaTta]- 
TopTav Cowv pelTa THY avadyywow Oo mpvTavis eizr(ev): || 
..+-] paruota [de] trav x[Latlaropraév Tov Katadelpopér lov 
Coty Tots aya tlolis xatad[epopévors..|.......]umov cuvvatas 
Twas Tovs waplolyvras amo ths BovdrArs w@lvloudcapev &va 
, o \ / ¢ \ 
Lapan[iwva ... tva pn | .......] ylé]vnras. Of Bovrgeuvtal 
elmr(ov)* atiwnte TpUTaM, c@lou nuiv, mpvTari, KAAdS apyis 


[507%] 


5 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


Ka[A@>s ...... 6 mpvtTavs elm(ev)*...]..----- ] ev Tat Aoyto- 
tnptwor éotiv. Oi Bovrevtal eli(ov): émiecxds 0 mpvTaus. | 
...+«[O rptravs eim(ev)* 6 vopjos KLe]Aever mpo EEaunvov Tov 
LeAAorpUTaviy dvonaterbar. “Trroutmvnok[w v]uads T..... || 
....[of] Blovrev]rai efr(ov): peta oKérews % dvopacia 
yeiv[e|Tae 7[..... 6 mpuTavis elm(ev): |....-.- Ju yap ev) 
voows eiul Kal ths wreupas [Pléyyouas, ws érictacOat, Kal 
SSRI Fk |...[Oi PBovrevtat eir(ov): ....]dure mpvtav, 
evyev[és] mpv[tlave, ére edue UTrép Huov, Kae AEva TOD éerrav[w 
xpovov. ...|.... O mputavis eim(ev)*........ ] éoriv, kal ot 
hutlo]u rovt[lov] tod pépouvs [o]de[é]\[ov]res....eouTw... 
Seas wii atk [Oé Bouvrevrat eim(ov)........ [ye iets ih sla aeeke 0 
mputavis elm(ev)* érrecd) o[nluepov mpoaoKxrAntov Bov[rAnv || 
Se pN WALDEN Abs Col aU aL WP 2 Jae w[povoltav troimontat atrav To... 

From Oxyrhynchus. This document is similar to no. 203. About 
sixteen letters are lost from the beginning of the lines and about 
fifty from the ends. The first question discussed deals with the 
textile industry which was apparently a municipal monopoly (cf. 
Grenfell-Hunt, Introduction to their commentary, and the refe- 
rences cited there). In Il. 1-4 some statement is made about debts 
and the value of garments. The receipt of six talents and a half of 
the fourteen talents from the nome on account of the city’s share is 
acknowledged. In Il. 4-11 Grenfell’s interpretation is as follows: 
The topic is the supply of yarn required for making the vestments 
of a local temple, which was under municipal jurisdiction, and the 
amount to be paid to the yarn-merchants. Owing to the difficulty 
of securing yarn the previous budget had to be modified. The village 
spinners had either refused or had been unable to carry out their 
engagements, and it had apparently been necessary to apply to the 
city yarn-merchants for the supply. Their price was considered too 
high by the senators and they reduced it from 49 to 30 denarii. In 
ll. 12-16 the weavers, who are organized in a guild, present a 
petition for higher remuneration in consideration of the increased 
cost of raw materials and the rise in wages of their assistants. The 
presentation of the petition to the local senate implies that the city 
controlled the industry rather than the state. 

In ll. 17 ff. reference is made to a communication from the 


[ 568 ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


strategus concerning the election of some official. Action on this 
was deferred until the next meeting. A further communication 
from the strategus dealt with the nomination of some one to convoy 
animals. The prytanis informed the senate that he had already 
nominated Sarapion with the approval of some senators who were 
with him at the time the communication was received in order 
that there might be no delay. The senate approved his appointment. 
From this it is clear that the prytanis did not make nominations on 
his own responsibility, but that he could act in an emergency and 
have the nomination approved at the next meeting of the senate 
(cf. pp. 89 ff; P. Oxy. 1412). In Il. 24 ff the prytanis calls 
attention to the fact that nominations for his office must be 
made six months in advance, and apparently asks for nominations 
from the senate. Apparently he was renominated by acclamation, 
but declined on the ground of ill-health. In this case the prytanis 
did not nominate his successor as was the case in certain other 
magistracies. Later the prefect appointed the prytanis (cf. no. 206), 
on the favorable vote of the senate. 


205. DE EXACTIONE TRIBUTI 
(saec. 111 p. Chr.) 


P. Br. Mus. 2, 213; Wilcken, Chrestomathte, 267. 


Ri ites CVO Bivins A stics A NG steer ns TATA Sse aie oats VOL. «TE 
Kal ...ecws Kal | ...dnr\@oai por a...TeK...evovoay | 
weed O1dbelor]y adrda xK[al] t[y]v wepull[ylevowévnv aa 
avtav mpocodov | call 7d] xa’ év SnrAdoai por. Ki yap |- 
§....wae. Te pos Yap TpaxGev | édéyyVOn, adtos éx[l] TA[Y] 
toTr@y | yevouevos OTs dv katadaPoupe ert || repuypadhe tov 
tapelov mpayOév, | rodTo Kata Tovs TOU Tapelou vomous | é« TE 
[[éx]] rév ody brrapxovtor | cal (Tov) b7revObvev KeXevaw aTro- 
cata|o[T]aPjvac. Eppad(c@ai ce) ev yo(uar). ||(’Erous) 8 Meyeip €. 

The origin of this piece of papyrus is unknown. It contains 
part of a rescript or edict of a strategus to the collector of taxes in 
one of the districts under his supervision. It is expressly stated that 
the law of the treasury rendered the property of a collector and of 
his guarantors liable for any fraud practised by him in the collection 
of the imperial revenues. Cf. Dig. 50. 6. 6, 10. 


[ 569 ] 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


206, DE MUNERE evOnviapxias 
(ca. saec. 11 fin. p. Chr.) 


P. Oxy. 1252, verso, col. 11. 

[Ilapa rod wlputdve[ws. | [Acé,] Hryeu@v déor7ror[ a] plolv, 
Tacav evOéviay bTapxew Tots TortTats,| | wddeoTa Sé THY TOD 
dptouv yopnytav. Kal viv etrvyds iv [......+.] | Kata tov 
mpoernrAvOota éviavTov avavéwolv TeToincat Tod ote pavou 
Tov] || evOnviapxiKovd Kal ayopavoplKod TOANBL Xpov@L TOVTwY 

3 , > \ / > / ¢€ \ / c / 
[érriNeroe]|roTwv. Avtos Totvuy éyo, Hy[e]u@v Kupte, UL royvo]s 
yetpotovn[ Geis Sta] | THs evTUYods cou deklds els THY Tapa 
"O£upuyy[ettais] mputaveiav alopévas (?)] | wapedOov eri to 
avadncacbat Tov otépavoyv TovTov dpovTidla ovdepi]|av aAAnv 
TETOINMAL KALTOL....Va EXOV TA eTrLKElpEVa por avlad@pa]||Ta 

By \ / A v a \ > \ \ 
els Te THY Stoiknaw THY Snuociwy NOVTPa@Y Kal ets TA AloLTTAa 
ToAt||TiKa Satravnpata Kal TO cuveyas THL BovrAne mwepl THs 
TOV apyovTe[y amrodei]|Eews. Kal 89 To Taya TO TOV yupVa- 
atdpyov amédecEev [e]vOn[viapyas] | téws ard tpidy Tov 
> / / f / ¢ / x 
érnaiws Entroupévov povovs Svo [.......-] | “Hpdxrevov viov 
IIXoutdpxou cal Saparappova viov ....p..[...+..00]||Tuves 

\ \ \ \ al a / > / 
KATA wey THY TpoTpoTHY THS Bovrms twaperOovtes alvd]t[iKa 
Tv] | apxnv mapnitncavto, toTtepov dé Teva OévTes Kal ...oVTES 
aver d8ovro] | cal éx pépous eyopnynoav Thy evOnviapyelay iv 
+ nw 5) / 9 A A / 
ede. maoalv.....é«] | KAnpouv amrodoOAvar THe wore. TeTpap- 
pévos yap eb éxaotov tétaxtas [éx KrAHpov] | Urép Tod avTods 
pn GOpows THY TeTPauNnvov YopnynoavTas D[.......] || éweTpl- 

¢ > / if. ” 

BeoOat. Ipoetpewaunv “Appovioy IIroAXapio[vos évapyov] | 
yupvaciapyov yvwobévta odetre AOLTrOY Ava THS evOn[vLap- 
yeas] | éavtod év tee petak® arodotvar brép Tod TovToUS 
avaktnow ol ticavras] | evpapas kal TO brdXOLTOV THs apyns 
aE > a ’ \ > \ > , = 
auéurt@s amodovva. “A[AAA érel] | émictadévtes ovToL 
Kopnynoat Tas Tpopas THe TWoNEL TOU UrroXotrov [ypovov] || TAS 
APXNS AVTOV aVTLNYoVTES EppwYTal, KATA TO avayKatov [mpoc- 
hevyw] | eri thy ony idecxpiveray akidy 81d TOD otpaTnyod 
avrov[s] Tov..... 

From Oxyrhynchus. This document belongs strictly to the 
Byzantine period, but it has been included in this collection because 


[ 57° ] 


DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


we learn that the office of eutheniarch and agoranomus had been 
discontinued in Oxyrhynchus before the beginning of the Byzantine 
period and had only recently been revived by the prefect. At the 
end of the second century Oxyrhynchus had nine and probably 
twelve eutheniarchs. The office had lapsed like many of the other 
municipal offices in the third century as the increasing cost of the 
liturgies attached to the magistracies made all positions in the 
municipality undesirable and so burdensome that citizens sought to 
avoid public service at any cost, even by going into exile or surrender- 
ing their property (cf. pp. 112 ff. nos. 180, 194, 198). In the period 
of Diocletian’s reign it is evident that many changes in organization 
had taken place. The appointment of the prytanis was ratified by 
the prefect. ‘The order of gymnasiarchs nominated the eutheniarchs, 
apparently on their own risk; for they had only nominated two 
out of the three required. ‘These two had sought to evade the office, 
but were finally persuaded to undertake the position. Each served 
four months in order that the difficulties of collective liability might 
be avoided. ‘The two appointees, having filled the first two terms 
in a somewhat dilatory fashion, refused to act in the third period 
of four months, and the prytanis asked the prefect to instruct the 
strategus to compel them to fulfil their term. 


Los 7terl 





ABBREVIATIONS 


Works frequently cited are designated by the following abbreviations: 


Abbott = Abbott, Roman Political Institutions. 

An. &p. = L année épigraphique. 

Archiv = Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung. 

Beaudouin = Beaudouin, Les grandes domaines dans 1 Empire romain. 

BGU.= Aegyptische Urkunden aus den kiniglichen Museum zu Berlin 
Griechische Urkunden. 

Bruns = Bruns, Fontes iuris Romani antiqui. 

B.C.H. = Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. 

Cagnat, JGRR. = Cagnat, Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes. 

C1G. = Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum. 

CIL. = Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum. 

C.P.R. = Corpus papyrorum Raineri. 

C.P.H. = Corpus papyrorum Hermopolitanorum. 

Cod. F.= Codex Fustinianus. 

Cod. Th. = Codex Theodosianus. 

Dessau = Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae selectae. 

Dict. Dar. = Daremberg-Saglio, Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et 
romaines. 

Dig. = Digesta corporis iuris civilis. 

Ditt. Or. Gr. = Dittenberger, Orientis Graecae inscriptiones selectae. 

Ditt. Sy//.3 = Dittenberger, Sy//oge inscriptionum Graecarum, ed. ter. 

E.E. = Ephemeris epigraphica, CIL. supplementum. 

Girard = Girard, Textes de droit romain. 

Herzog = Herzog, Geschichte und System der rimischen Staatsverfassung. 

Hirschfeld = Hirschfeld, Die kaiserliche Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Dio- 
cletian. 

I.B.M.= Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum. 

IG. = Inscriptiones Graecae. 

Jouguet, Vie munic. = Jouguet, La vie municipale dans l Egypte romaine. 

Karlowa = Karlowa, Rémische Rechtsgeschichte. 

Lafoscade = Lafoscade, De epistulis imperatorum magistratuumque Ro- 
mManorum . 

Latyschev = Latyschev, Inscriptiones antiguae orae Septentrionalis Ponti 
Euxini, Graecae et Latinae. 


[ 5734) 


ABBREVIATIONS 


Le Bas-Waddington = Le Bas-Waddington, Voyage archéologique en Gréce 
et en Asie Mineure: Inscriptions. 

Liebenam, St. Verw. = Liebenam, Stédteverwaltung im rimischen Kaiser- 
reiches. 

Madvig, Verf. u. Verw.= Madvig, Die Verfassung und Verwaltung des 
rimischen Staats. 

Marquardt, St. Verw. = Marquardt, Rimische Staatsverwaltung. 

Mitteis, Chrestomathie; Grundziige = Mitteis-Wilcken, Grundziige und 
Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde, Zweiter Band: Furisticher Teil. 
Erste Halfte; Grundziige. Zweite Halfte; Chrestomathie. 

. Amh. = Amherst Papyri. 

. Br. Mus. = Greek Papyri in the British Museum. 

. Fay. = Fayiim Towns and their Papyri. 

. Fior. = Papiri Fiorentint. 

. Giess. = Griechische Papyri im Museum d. Oberhess. Geschichtsvereins 
zu Giessen. 

. Oxy. = Oxyrhynchus Papyri. 

. Ryl. = Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the Rylands Library. 

P.S.I.= Papiri della Societa Italiana. 

P. Teb. = Tebtunis Papyri. 

Prosop. = Prosopographia imperii Romani. 

R.E. = Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, Realencyclopadie der classischen Altertums- 

wissenschaft. 

Riccobono = Riccobono, Fontes iuris Romani anteiustiniani. 

Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. = Rostowzew, Studien zur Geschichte der 
romischen Kolonats. 

Supp. Ep. Gr. = Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. 

T.A.M. = Tituli Asiae Minoris. 

Tod = Tod, Lnternational Arbitration. 

Wilcken, Chrestomathie; Grundziige = Mitteis-Wilcken, Grundziige und 
Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde, Erster Band: Historische Teil. Erste 
Halfte; Grundziige. Zweite Halfte; Chrestomathie. 

Wilmans = Wilmans, Exempla inscriptionum Latinarum. 


= Sas Sola Ba = He = 


SEA, 


L 574 J 


Io. 


12. 


13. 


I4. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


I. DOCUMENTS FROM ITALY AND THE 
PROVINCES 


. Epistula Flaminini ad Chyretienses (196-194 a. Chr.). 


IG. 1X, 2, 338; CIG. 1770; Ditt. Syll.3 593; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 1. 


. Decretum proconsulis Hispaniae Ulterioris (189 a. Chr.). 


CIL. ut, 5041; Dessau, 15; Bruns, 70; Riccobono, p. 248. 


. Epistula Spuri Postumi, praetoris, ad Delphos (189 a. Chr.). 


Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 10; Ditt. Syll.3 612. 

Epistula consulis ad Heracleotas (ca. 189-188 a. Chr.). 
CIG. 3800; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 3; Ditt. Syll3 618; Rev. é. an. 
19 (1917), 237 f- 


. Senatus consulta de Thisbensibus (170 a. Chr.). 


IG. Vu, 22253 Ditt. Syll.3 646; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 113; Riccobono, 
p- 199; Bruns, 37. 


. Senatus consultum de Delo (164 a. Chr.). 


Ditt. Syl.3 664. 


. Senatus consultum de Tiburtibus (ca. 159 a. Chr.). 


CIL. 1, 201 = XIV, 3584; Dessau, 19; Bruns, 39; Riccobono, p. 204. 
Senatus consultum de Narthaciensibus et Melitaeensibus (159-147 


a. Chr.). 
IG. 1X, 2, 89; Ditt. Syll3 674; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 8; 
Tod, xxxrv; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 12. 


. Epistula Q. Fabi Maximi ad Dymaeos (ca. 139 a. Chr.). 


CIG. 1543; Ditt. Syl/.3 684; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 4. 
Sententia O. M. Minuciorum inter Genuates et Viturios (117 a. Chr.). 
CIL. 11, 199 = V, 7749; Dessau, 5946; Bruns, 184. 


. Lex Osca Tabulae Bantinae (150-100 a. Chr.). 


Bruns, 8; Girard, p. 26; Riccobono, p. 130; Buck, Oscan and Umbrian 
Grammar, p. 230; v. Planta, Gramm. d. osk.-umbr. Dial. 2, 599; 
Conway, Exempla Selecta, z. 
Senatus consultum de controversia inter publicanos et Pergamenos (in. 
saec. 1 a. Chr.). 
E.E. 4, 213 ff.; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 15. 


Decretum Cn. Pompei Strabonis (go a. Chr.). 
CIL. 1”, 709; Dessau, 8888; Girard, p. 61; An. &. 1911, n0. 126; Bull. 
arch. com. 38 (1910), 275. 


Tlienses honorant Lucium Iulium Caesarem (89 a. Chr.). 
Ditt. Or. Gr. 440. 


Ry sda 


ey 


16. 


17% 


18. 


TQ. 


20. 


2I. 


22. 


eh 


24. 


25. 


26. 


eh 


28. 


29. 


30. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


Tabulae ad memoriam libertatis restitutae servandam aptae (81 a.Chr.). 
CIL. 1, 587, 588, 589. 
Senatus consultum de ‘Tabenis (82 a. Chr.). 
Ditt. Or. Gr. 442. 
Senatus consultum de Stratonicensibus (ca. 81 a. Chr.). 
Ditt. Or. Gr. 441, ll. 1-129; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 16. 
Senatus consultum de Amphiarai Oropi agris (73 a. Chr.). 
IG. vit, 4133 Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 18; Ditt. Syll.3 747; Bruns, 42; 
Riccobono, p. 209; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 25. 
Lex Antonia de ‘Termessibus (ca. 71 a. Chr.). 
CIL. 1, 204; Bruns, 14; Dessau, 38; Girard, pp. 68-70; Riccobono, 
pp- 105-107. 
Lex municipi Tarentini (ca. 88-62 a. Chr.?). 
Dessau, 6086; Bruns, 27; Riccobono, p. 132; Girard, p. 61. 


Lex Gabinia Calpurnia de Deliis (58 a. Chr.). 
Diirrbach, Chozx d’inscr. Délos, 163; Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 335. 


Epistula proconsulis Asiae ad provinciales (ca. 56-50 a. Chr.). 
Knackfuss, Das Rathaus von Milet, p. 101, ll. 38 ff. 


Pergameni honorant Publium Servilium Isauricum (ca. 46 a. Chr.). 
Ditt. Or. Gr. 449; Fraenkel, Alterthiimer von Pergamon, 413. 


Tabula Heracleensis, vulgo Lex Iulia Municipalis (45 a. Chr.). 
CIL. 1, 206; Bruns, 18; Dessau, 6085; Girard, p. 80; Riccobono, 
Pp. 109. 

Senatus consultum et epistula Caesaris ad Mytilenaeos (45 a. Chr.). 
IG. Xi, 2, 35, ll. 14, f-; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 33; Ditt. Syll.3 764. 


Lex coloniae Genitivae Iuliae seu Ursonensis (44 a. Chr.). 
CIL. 11, S. 5439; Dessau, 6087; Bruns, 28; Girard, p. 89; Riccobono, 
p- 142. 
Lex de Gallia Cisalpina, vulgo Lex Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina 
(49-42 a. Chr.). 
CIL. 1, 205=XI, 1146; Bruns, 16; Girard, p. 72; Riccobono, p. 135. 
Fragmentum Atestinum (49-42 a. Chr.). 
Notizie degli scavi, 1880, 213; Bruns, 173 Girard, p. 78; Riccobono, 
p- 140. 
Epistulae Antoni et Caesaris ad Plarasenses et Aphrodisienses (39— 
Ary Olid bs 
CIG. 2737; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 5; Bruns, 43; Ditt. Or. Gr. 453- 
455; Riccobono, p. 217. 
Epistula Augusti ad Mylasenses (31 a. Chr.). 
Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 6; Ditt. Syll.3 768. 


[ 576 ] 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


. Titulus operis publici (31 a. Chr.). 


Notizie degli scavi, 1915, 139; An. ép. 1916, no. 60, 


. Epistula imperatoris, vel proconsulis, ad Mylasenses (ca. 30 a. Chr.). 


Le Bas-Waddington, 3. 442-443; CIG. 2695), 27008. 


. Edictum Augusti de aquaeductu Venafrano (17-11 a. Chr.). 


CIL. X, 4842; Bruns, 77; Girard, p. 186; Riccobono, p. 316; Dessau, 
5743- 


. Decretum concili Asiae de fastis provincialibus (ca. 9 a. Chr.). 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 458, ll. 78 ff.; Inschriften von Priene, 105. 


. Epistula P. Corneli Scipionis, proconsulis Asiae, ad Thyatirenos 


(7-6 a. Chr.). 
Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1211; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 8. 


. Epistula imperatoris Augusti ad Cnidios (6 a. Chr.). 


Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 9; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1031; IG. xl, 3, 1743 
Ditt. Syll.3 780. 


. Iusiurandum Paphlagonum (3 a. Chr.). 


Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 1373; Ditt. Or. Gr. 532. 


. Res gestae divi Augusti (28 a. Chr.—6 p. Chr.). 


CIL. Ill, pt. 11, pp. 769 f.3 Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 158. 


. Edictum proconsulis Asiae de muro Ephesio (ca. 11 p. Chr.). 


I.B.M. 5213 Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 7; Ditt. Syll.3 784. 


. Epistula proconsulis Asiae ad Chios (5-14 p. Chr.). 


CIG. 2222; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 943; Ditt. Syll.3 785. 


. Titulus honorarius (ca. 14 p. Chr.). 


CIL. 111, 17413 Dessau, 938. 


. Titulus sepulchralis (p. 14 p. Chr.). 


CIL. Ul, 52323; Dessau, 1977. 


. Decretum centumvirorum (26 p. Chr.). 


CIL. X1, 3805; Dessau, 6579. 


. Tabula patronatus (27 p. Chr.). 


CIL. Vv, 4919; Dessau, 6100. 


. Fasti magistratuum municipalium (p. 33 p. Chr.). 


CIL. X, 1233; Dessau, 6124. 


. Lites inter Cierenses et Metropolitanos (11-35 p. Chr.). 


IG. 1X, 2, 261; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 31; Tod, XLt. 


. Turisiurandi Aritiensium in principem formula (37 p. Chr.). 


CIL. 11, 1723 Dessau, 190; Bruns, ror. 


. Decretum et iusiurandum Assiorum (37 p. Chr.). 


Bruns, 102; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 251; Ditt. Syll.3 797. 


. Edictum Claudi de civitate Anaunorum (46 p. Chr.). 


CIL. v, 5050; Dessau, 206; Bruns, 79; Girard, p. 188; Riccobono, 
p- 318; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 39. 


AMA heyy 37 


50. 


64. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


Oratio Claudi de iure honorum Gallis dando (48 p. Chr.). 
CIL. xul, 1668; Dessau, 212; Bruns, 52; Riccobono, p. 228; Nip- 
perdey’s Tacztus!°, 2, 317-322. 


. Edictum Claudi de cursu publico (49-50 p. Chr.). 


CIL. 111, S. 1, 72513; Dessau, 214. 


. Decretum Rhodiorum de libertate (51 p. Chr.). 


IG. Xl, 1, 2, et corrigenda, p. 206; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1123. 


. Titulus honorarius (p. 54 p. Chr.). 


Compt. rend. de lacad. d. inscr. et bel. lettr. 1915, 396; An. ép. 1916, 
no. 42. 


Epistula imperatoris Neronis ad Rhodios (55 p. Chr.). 
Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1124; Ditt. Syll.3 810. 


. De praediis publicis Gortyniorum (64 p. Chr.). 


"Apxatodoyikov Aedtiov, 2 (1916), 6. 


. Oratio imperatoris Neronis de Graecorum libertate (67 p. Chr.). 


IGi Vu, 27133 Ditt. Sy 814. 


. Decretum Petroni et Pupi de finibus Sagalassensium (54-68 p. Chr.). 


de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 40; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 335; Ditt. 
OroGr, $38: 


° 


. Decretum proconsulis Sardiniae de finibus Patulcensium et Galillen- 


sium (69 p. Chr.). 
CIL. X, 78523; Dessau, 5947; Bruns, 71a; Girard, p. 179; Mommsen, 
Ges. Schr. 5, 325 ff-3 Riccobono, p. 256; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato 
pubblico, 43. 


. Rescriptum Vespasiani ad Vanacinos (ca. 72 p. Chr.). 


CIL. X, 8038; Bruns, 80; Girard, p. 190; Riccobono, p. 320. 


. Titulus sacer (76 p. Chr.). 


CIL. 1, 1610; Dessau, 1981. 


. Epistula Vespasiani ad Saborenses (78 p. Chr.). 


CIL. 1, 1423; Dessau, 6092; Bruns, 81; Girard, p. 190; Riccobono, 
p: 320, 


. Lex de officiis et honoribus flaminis provinciae Narbonensis (69- 


79 p. Chr.). 


CIL,. x1, 6038; Dessau, 6964; Riccobono, p. 159; Bruns, 29; Carette, 
Les assemblées prov. de la Gaule rom. 445 ff. 


. Epistula Domitiani ad Falerienses (82 p. Chr.). 


CIL. 1X, 5420; Bruns, 82; Girard, p. 191; Riccobono, p. 321. 


Lex Salpensa (81-84 p. Chr.). 


CIL. 11, 1963; Dessau, 6088; Bruns, 30a; Girard, p- 108; Riccobono, 
p- 162. 


bo 573] 


65. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


Lex Malacitana (81-84 p. Chr.). 


CIL. ul, 1964; Dessau, 6089; Bruns, 306; Girard, p. 1123 Riccobono, 
p. 168. 


65@. Edictum L. Antisti Rustici, legati Domitiani, de annona coloniae 


66. 
67. 


68. 


69. 
70. 
rie 
72. 


73: 


74: 
75° 
76. 
77: 
78. 


79: 


80. 


Antiochiae (ca. 93 p. Chr.). 

Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 55 (1924), 5 ff.; fourn. Rom. Studies, 14.(1924), 180. 
Titulus honorarius (81-96 p. Chr.). 

CIL. 11, 19453; Dessau, 1982. 
Titulus honorarius (96-97 p. Chr.). 

B.C.H. 44 (1920), 73; An. &. 1922, no. 30. 
Epistulae Laberi Maximi et aliorum de finibus Histrianorum (43- 
100 p. Chr.). 


An. &. 1919, no. 10; Annales de l’académie Roumaine, 38, no. 15; 
Wilhelm, Anzeiger der Akad. der Wissen. in Wien, 59 (1922), 78 ff-3 
Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 329. 


Decretum Chiorum de pecunia administranda (saec. 1 p. Chr.). 
Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 948. 

Smyrnaeorum Portaria (saec. fere 1 vel 11 p. Chr.). 
I.B.M. 10213 Ditt. Syl/.3 1262; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1427. 

Epistula Aquili Proculi, proconsulis Asiae, ad Ephesios (104 p. Chr.). 
I.B.M. 481 (pt. Iv, p. 246, ll. 336 f7.); Laum, Stzftungen, 74. 

Titulus operis publici (111 p. Chr.). 
An. &p. 1904, no. 59. 

Senatus consultum et epistula Traiani ad Pergamenos de ludis in- 

staurandis (112-117 p. Chr.). 
CIL. ut, S. 7086; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 336; Fraenkel, Alterthiimer von 
Pergamon, VII, 2, 269. 

Epistula procuratorum ad colonos Villae Magnae (116-117 p. Chr.). 
Bruns, 114; Girard, p. 870; Riccobono, p. 352. 

Epistula imperatoris ‘Traiani ad Astypalaeenses (117 p. Chr.). 
Cagnat, IGRRK. 4, 10323; IG. XII, 3, 175. 

Epistula imperatoris Hadriani ad Astypalaeenses (118 p. Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 19; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1032¢; IG. XII, 3, 176; Ditt. Syl.3 832. 

Epistula legati ad Pompaelonenses (119 p. Chr.). 
CIL. 1, 2959. 

Epistula imperatoris Hadriani ad Ephesios (120 p. Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 23; Ditt. Sy//3 833. 

Epistula imperatoris Hadriani (?) ad Heracleotas (121-125 p. Chr.). 
B.C.H. 21 (1897), 162. 

Epistula legati Lyciae, Valeri Severi, ad Rhodiapolitanos (125 p. Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 104; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 16. 


[ 579 4 37-2 


SI. 


82. 


83. 


84. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


Rescriptum imperatoris Hadriani(?) ad Pergamenos de collybo 

(125 p. Chr.?). 

Ditt. Or. Gr. 484; Fraenkel, Alterthiimer von Pergamon, VUI, 2, 279. 
Epistula Avidi Quieti, proconsulis Asiae, ad Aezanitas (125-126 
p.-Cht.); 

CIG. 3835; Le Bas-Waddington, 860-863; Lafoscade, 93; Ditt. Or. Gr. 

502; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 571; CIL. ul, 355, S. 7003; de Ruggiero, 

L’ arbitrato pubblico, 57. 

Epistula imperatoris Hadriani ad Stratonicenses (127 p. Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 23; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1156a; Ditt. Syll.3 837; Riccobono, 
P+\325+ 

Epistula Pomponi Vettoniani, legati Lyciae, ad commune Lyciorum 

(128 p. Chr.). 

Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 143 Lafoscade, 103. 


. Epistula imperatoris Hadriani ad Ephesios (129 p. Chr.). 


Lafoscade, 26; 1.B.M. 3, 487; Ditt. SylJ3 838. 


Privilegia concessa Dianae Ephesiae ab imperatore Hadriano (129 
p. Chr.). 
Ditt. Syll.3 839. 


. Epistula Sufenatis Veri, legati Lyciae, ad lyciarcham (131 p. Chr.). 


Lafoscade, 105; Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, c. 18. 


. Titulus honorarius (132 p. Chr.). 


CIL. tI, S. 1, 72823 Dessau, 315. 


. Lex Palmyrenorum (137 p. Chr.). 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 629; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 1056, ll. 1-16. 


. Lex de certa olei portione rei publicae vendenda (117-138 p. Chr.). 


IG, 11 and 11 (ed. min.), 1100; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 36. 


. Epistula imperatoris Hadriani (?) ad Athenienses (117-138 p. Chr.). 


IG. 11 and 11 (ed. min.), 1103. 


. Edictum imperatoris Hadriani (?) de vectigalibus (117-138 p. Chr.). 


IG. 11 and 111 (ed. min.), 1104. 


. Sermo et epistulae procuratorum de terris vacuis excolendis (117= 


138 p. Chr.). 
Carcopino, Mélanges de l’école franc. de Rome, 26 (1906), 365-4813 
An. ép. 1907, no. 196; Bruns, 116; Girard, p. 874; Riccobono, p. 357. 


. Titulus honorarius (117-138 p. Chr.). 


CIL. U1, 5941; Dessau, 6954. 


. Titulus honorarius (119-138 p. Chr.). 


CIL. I, 3239. 


. Senatus consultum de nundinis saltus Beguensis (138 p. Chr.). 


CIL, Vil, 270 = vill, §. 11451; Bruns, 61; Riccobono, p. 236. 


[ 580 ] 


97: 


Too, 


IOI. 


102. 


103. 


104. 


105. 


106, 


107. 


108. 


109. 


It2. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


Epistula Corneli Proculi, legati Lyciae, ad commune Lyciorum 


(139 p. Chr.). 
Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 28; Lafoscade, 108. 


. Epistula proconsulis Asiae, L. Venulei Aproniani, ad Ephesios (ca. 


138-139 p. Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 94. 


. Epistula Corneli Proculi, legati Lyciae, ad scribam publicum Myrorum 


(140 p. Chr.). 
Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 343; Lafoscade, 110. 
Epistula imperatoris Antonini Pii ad Ephesios (140-144 p. Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 513; Ditt. Sy//.3 849. 
Epistula imperatoris Antonini Pii ad Ephesios (145 p. Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 54; Ditt. Syl. 850; I.B.M. 3, 491. 
Epistula Rupili Severi, legati Lyciae, ad lyciarcham (150 p. Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 114; Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, c. 45. 
Titulus operis publici (152 p. Chr.). 
An. ép. 1904, nO. 21. 
Tres epistulae Antonini Pii ad Coronenses et Thisbenses (140- 
155 p. Chr.). 
IG. vu, 2870. 
Edictum proconsulis Asiae, Popili Cari, de diebus festis Ephesiorum 
(ca. 160 p. Chr.). 
I.B.M. 4823 CIG. 2954; Ditt. Syl/.3 867. 
Senatus consultum de Cyzicenis (138-160 p. Chr.). 
CIL. 111, S.7060; Dessau, 7190; £.E. 3,156; Bruns, 62; Riccobono, p. 237. 
Titulus honorarius (138-161 p. Chr.). 
CIL. X11, 594; Dessau, 6988. 


Epistula imperatoris Antonini Pii ad Minoetas (138-161 p. Chr.). 
IG. Xu, 7, 242; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, roro. 


Epistula praefectorum praetorio (168-172 p. Chr.). 
CIL. 1X, 2438; Bruns, 715; Riccobono, p. 260. 


. Senatus consultum de sumptibus ludorum gladiatorum minuendis 


(176-177 p. Chr.). 
CIL. 1, S. 6278; Dessau, 5163; Bruns, 63; Riccobono, p. 238. 


. Rescriptum Commodi de saltu Burunitano (180-183 p. Chr.). 


CIL, vu, 10570; cf. S. 14464; Dessau, 6870; Bruns, 86; Girard, p. 199; 
Riccobono, p. 361. 


Epistula imperatoris Commodi ad Chersonesitanos de capitulo leno- 
cinii (185-186 p. Chr.). 
Latyschev, 4, 81; CYL. ut, S. 13750; Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 860, ll. 32 ff. 


[ 581 ] 


113. 


114. 


IIS. 


116. 


LIy2 


118. 


I1Q. 


120. 


I2!I. 


122. 


ro) 


124. 


126. 


126. 


127, 


128. 


129. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


Epistula Iuli Saturnini, legati Syriae,ad Phaenesios (185-186 p. Chr.): 

Lafoscade, 117; Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 1119; Ditt. Or. Gr. 609. 

Epistula proconsulis Lyciae et Pamphyliae ad Sidymeos eh a 
192 p. Chr.). 
Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 582; T.A.M. 2, 175. 
Titulus honorarius (150-200 p. Chr.). | 
An. &p. 1902, no. 164; Dessau, 6780; Compt. rend. de lacad. d. inser. 
et bel. lettr. 1902, 38. 
Titulus honorarius (saec. 1 vel 11 p. Chr.). 

Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 634; T.A.M. 2, 291. 

Decretum Hierapolitanorum de paraphylacibus (saec. 1 vel 11 p. Chr.). 

Ditt. Or. Gr. 527. 

Edictum vel epistula auctoris incerti ad Beroiaeos (saec. I-11 p. che ye 

B.C.H. 37 (1913), 90f- 

Epistula proconsulis Asiae ad Coos (saec. 1-11 p. Chr.). 

Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1044; Paton and Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos, 26. 
Epistula imperatoris incerti ad proconsulem seu legatum Asiae (saec. 
11 p. Chr.). 

Rew. d. ét. gr. 19 (1906), 83. 

Rescriptum imperatoris ad Lacedaemonios (saec. 11 p. Chr.). 

IG. Vv, 21. 

Titulus honorarius Poglensis (saec. 1 vel 11 p. Chr.). 
Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 409. 
Titulus honorarius (saec. 11 p. Chr.). 

Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 788; Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, 2, 462. 
Edictum seu epistula proconsulis ad Ephesios (saec. 11 p. Chr.). 

B.C.H. 7 (1883), 5043 Inschriften von Magnesia, 114. 

Titulus honorarius (150-200 p. Chr.). 
CIL. viu, S. 17899=E£.E. 5, 698. 
Titulus honorarius (saec. 11 p. Chr.). 
Rev. arch. 3 (1916), 3393; An. &. 1916, no. 120. 


Epistula imperatorum Severi et Caracallae ad Smyrnaeos (198 
2.0 DACht.); 

CIG. 3178; Lafoscade, 72; Ditt. Syl/.3 876; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1402. 
Decretum Myrensium de navigatione (saec. 11 vel 111 p. Chr.). 


Le Bas-Waddington, 13113; CIG. 43024 (Add. p. 1136), Ditt. Or. Gr. 
572. 


Edictum M. Ulpi proconsulis et epistula Gemini Modesti proconsulis 
Achaiae ad ‘Thisbenses (saec. 11 vel 111 in. p. Chr.). 
IG. vu, 2226, 2227, Add. p. 7473; Ditt. Syl/.3 884. 


[ 582 ] 


139. 


140. 


I4I. 


142. 


143. 


144. 


145. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


. Epistula imperatorum Severi et Caracallae ad Tyranos (201 p. Chr.). 


CIL. 111, 781; Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 598; Bruns, 89; Dessau, 423; Ricco- 
bono, p. 332. 


. Edictum legati imperatorum, Q. Sicini Clari, de Pizo condenda 


(202. p., Chr’). 
Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 766; Ditt. Sy/l.3 880; Kalinka, Ant. Denk. Bulgar, 
34. 


. Edictum imperatorum Severi et Caracallae de hospitio (204 p. Chr.). 


Lafoscade, 743 Ditt. SylJ.3 881; CIL, 1, S. 14203%°9; IG. XII, 5, 132. 


. Decretum Mylasensium de trapezitis (209-211 p. Chr.). 


Ditt. OniGr: ere. 


. Epistula imperatoris Caracallae ad Philadelphenos (213-214 p. 


Chr.). 
Lafoscade, 78; Ditt. Syl/.3 883; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1619. 


. Tabula patronatus (222 p. Chr.). 


CIL. vi, 14543 Dessau, 6109. 


. Album decurionum (223 p. Chr.). 


CIL. IX, 338; Dessau, 6121. 


. Epistula proconsulis Asiae ad Aphrodisienses (222-235 p. Chr.). 


Rev, d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 86 f. 


. Titulus honorarius (222-235 p. Chr.). 


Rev. d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 84. 


Rescriptum imperatoris Gordiani.ad Scaptoparenos (238 p. Chr.), 
CIL. 111, S. 12336; Cagnat, JGRR. 1, 674; Ditt. Sy/.3 888; Riccobono, 
p- 3713 Girard, p. 205. 

Titulus honorarius (238 p. Chr.). 
CIL. X11, 3162; Desjardins, Géographie de la Gaule rom. planches 
VII, VIII, IX. 

Rescriptum imperatorum de querellis Araguenorum (244-247 p. 

Chr.). 
CIL. ut, S. 141913 Ditt. Or. Gr. 519; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 598; Bruns, 93; 
Girard, p. 207; Riccobono, p. 373; Rém. Mitth. 13 (1898), 231 ff. 

Epistula colonorum ad imperatores (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.). 
Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-1915), 37/- 


Epistula vicanorum ad imperatores (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.). 
Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-1915), 25. 
QOuerellae vicanorum (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.). 
Denkschrifien der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-1915), 11. 
Epistula imperatorum ‘Traiani Deci et Herenni Etrusci ad Aphro- 
disienses (251 p. Chr.). 
Le Bas-Waddington, 3, 1624; CIG. 2743. 


[ 583 ] 


146. 


147. 


each 


160. 


16r. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


Decretum decurionum et possessorum (256, vel fortasse 186, p. Chr.). 
An. &p. 1903, no. 2023 cf. ibid. 1894, no. 61. 
Edictum imperatorum Valeriani et Gallieni de nundinis (253- 


259 p. Chr.). 
Le Bas-Waddington, 3, 27204; Ditt. Or. Gr. 262; CIG. 4474. 


. Epistula proconsulis Asiae de nundinis constituendis (260-270 


p. Chr.). 
Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1381. 


. Decretum xv virum de sacris faciundis (289 p. Chr.). 


CIL. X, 3698; Dessau, 4175; Bruns, 75; Riccobono, p. 262. 


. Titulus honorarius (saec. 111 p. Chr.). 


Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-1915), 87. 


. Epistula imperatorum incertorum de constitutione civitatis Tyman- 


denorum (saec. 111 p. Chr.?). 
CIL. 111, S. 6866; Dessau, 6090; Bruns, 34; Riccobono, p. 338. 


. Rescriptum de officialium exactionibus inlicitis (saec. 111 p. Chr.). 


CIL. vu, S. 17639. 


. Titulus operis publici (ca. 312 p. Chr.). 


CIL. Vill, 210=VIII, S. 11299. 


. Epistula Ablabi praefecti praetorio et Constantini imperatoris de iure 


civitatis Orcistanorum (323-326; 331 p. Chr.). 
CIL. 111, S. 7000; Dessau, 6091; Bruns, 35; Riccobono, p. 341. 


. Edictum Constantini ad Umbros (326-337 p. Chr.). 


CIL. XI, 5265; Dessau, 705; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 8, 25. 


. Titulus honorarius (362-363 p. Chr.). 


CIL. Vv, 8987; Dessau, 755. 


Rescriptum Valentiniani Valentis Gratiani de moenibus instaurandis 
et de reditu fundorum civitatium Asiae (371 p. Chr.). 
Anzeiger der Akad. der Wissen. in Wien, 1905, no. 10; Fahreshefte d. 
dst. archaeol. Inst. 8 (1905), Beiblatt, 71 f.; ibid. 9 (1906), 40 f.; Bruns, 
974; Riccobono, p. 374. 


. Rescriptum imperatorum Valentiniani Valentis Gratiani ad Festum 


proconsulem Asiae de ludis provincialibus (375 p. Chr.). 
Bruns, 976. 


. Titulus honorarius (376 p. Chr.). 


CIL. Vi, 17363; Dessau, 1256. 


Index sodalium familiae publicae (saec. 1v p. Chr.?). 
CIL. xv, 255; Dessau, 6153. 


Decretum provinciae Africae (saec. 1v p. Chr.?). 
CIL. virt, S. rr014. 


[ 584 ] 


170, 


zt. 
172. 
Lea: 
174. 
res 


176. 


Gae 


178. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


II. DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 


. Edictum L. Aemili Recti de angaria (42 p. Chr.). 


P. Br. Mus. 11713; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 439. 


. Edictum Cn. Vergili Capitonis praefecti (49 p. Chr.). 


CIG. 3, 4956, Addenda, p. 1236; Lafoscade, 119; Ditt. Or. Gr. 665. 


. Edictum L. Lusi Getae de immunitate sacerdotum (54 p. Chr.). 


Lafoscade, 120; Ditt. Or. Gr. 664; Milne, Greek Inscriptions, p. 11. 


. Edictum Tiberi Iuli Alexandri praefecti (68 p. Chr.). 


Ditt. Or. Gr. 669; CIG. 4957 (cf. vol. 3, Add. p. 1236); Riccobono, p. 
253; Girard, p. 174. 


. De censu dwdexadpaxpwv (86-87 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 258; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 216. 


. De vectigalibus locandis (ca. 81-96 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 44; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 275. 


. Edictum Gai Vibi Maximi, praefecti (104 p. Chr.). 


P. Br. Mus. 3, 904; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 202. 


mee sumptibus yupvac.apxias minuendis (1 I4—I1I7 p. Chr.). 


P. Amh. 2, 70; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 149. 
Epistulae Petroni Mamertini et Statili Maximi de immunitate civium 
Antinoopolitanorum (135, 156 p. Chr.). 
Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 26. 
De vectigalibus exigendis a senioribus vici (136 p. Chr.). 
P. Br. Mus. 2, 255; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 272. 
De civibus ad munera subeunda nominatis (ca. 137 p. Chr.). 
BGU. 235; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 399. 
De statu civium Romanorum et Alexandrinorum (139 p. Chr.). 
BGU. 747; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 35. 
De immunitate medicorum (140 p. Chr.). 
P. Fay. 106; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 395. 
Edictum M. Semproni Liberalis, praefecti (154 p. Chr.). 
BGU. 372; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 19. 
De immunitate patribus Antinoopolitanorum concessa (159 p. Chr.). 


Compt. rend. de Vacad. d. inscr. et bell. lettr. 1905, 160 ff.; Wilcken, 
Chrestomathie, 28. 


De immunitate veteranorum (172 p. Chr.). 
BGU. 180; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 396. 


De muneribus sacerdotum (177 p. Chr.). 
BGU. 194; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 84. 


fo stsn 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


. De immunitate mulierum (ca. 180 p. Chr.). 


P. Teb. 327; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 394. 


. De fuga eorum qui muneribus obnoxii sunt (186 p. Chr.). 


P. Geneva, 37; Wilcken, Chrestomathte, 400. 


. De nominatione magistratuum (192 p. Chr.). 


Po Ry 99k 4295 


. De muneribus vicanorum (194 p. Chr.). 


BGU. 15, col. 1; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 393. 


. De immunitate Antinoopolitanorum (196 p. Chr.). 


BGU. 1022; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 29. 


. De connubio Antinoopolitanorum et Aegyptorum (saec. 11 p. Chr.). 


Compt. rend. del acad. d. inscr. et bell. lettr. 1905, 160 ff.; Wilcken, 
Chrestomathie, 27. 


. De munere eorum qui vectigalia exigunt (200 p. Chr.?). 


PL OXY. 1405; 


. De vicis deminuendis (ca. 200 p. Chr.). 


Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 8; Festschrift Hirschfeld, 125. 


. De muneribus Oxyrhynchi (201 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 54. 


. De vectigalibus (ca. 202 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 890; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 280. 


. Epistula imperatoris Septimi Severi ad Aurelium Horionem 


(202 p. Chr.). 
P. Oxy. 705, ll. 54 ff.; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 407. 


. Querellae vicanorum contra possessores (207 p. Chr.). 


Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 4284, ll. 1-17. 


. De tribubus metropoleos (212 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 1030; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 36. 


. Edictum Caracallae de civitate peregrinis danda (212 p. Chr.). 


P. Giess. 40 (cf. vol. 111, p. 164); Mitteis, Chrestomathie, 377; Segré- 
Beltrami, Rivista di Filologia, 45 (1917), 16 ff.; Meyer, Furistische 
Papyri, 1; Girard, p. 203. 


. Edictum Caracallae de reditu Aegyptiorum in agros (215 p. Chr. 


P. Giess. 40, col. 11, Il. 16-29; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 22. 


. De severitate munerum (216 p. Chr.). 


BGU. 159; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 408. 


. Edictum Caracallae de senatoribus (213~217 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 1406. 


. Edictum Aureli Serenisci de censu (226 p. Chr.). 


P. Teb. 288; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 266. 
[ 586 ] 


205. 


206. 


LIST OF DOCUMENTS 


. De munere decaprotorum (post 242 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 62, verso; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 278. 


. De cessione bonorum eorum qui munera declinant (250 p. Chr.). 


C.P.R. 20; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 402. 


. De trapezitis Oxyrhynchi (260 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 1411. 


. De nominatione eorum qui munera subeunt (265 p. Chr.). 


P. Fior. 2, vit, ll. 166-201; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 401. 


. De conductione agrorum publicorum (266 p. Chr.). 


C.P.H. 119, recto, col. vit; C.P.R. 39; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 377. 


. Epistula senatus Hermopolitani ad orparnydv (266-267 p. Chr.). 


C.P.H. 52; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 38. 


. Acta senatus Oxyrhynchi (270-275 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 1413. 


. Acta senatus Oxyrhynchi (270-275 p. Chr.). 


P. Oxy. 1414. 
De exactione tributi (saec. 111 p. Chr.). 
P. Br. Mus. 2, 213; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 267. 


De munere ed@nvapyias (ca. saec. 111 fin. p. Chr.). 
P. Oxy. 1252, verso, col. II. 


[ 587 ] 


INDEX 


absentes rei publicae causa, 105 

Achaea, 163, 166, nos. 8, 9, 46 

Acraephia, no. 56 

acta senatus, nos. 203, 204 

actor, Nos. 139, 157 

adiectio, 37, 211 

adlectio of citizens, 58 

adnotationes, 237 

Adramyttus, no. 22 

aediles, 59, 63, 89, nos. 20, 24, 26, 45, 
63, 64, 65 

Aemilius Paullus, 70, no. 2 

Aetolia, nos. 1, 3 

Aezani, no. 82 

Africa, 15 f., 85, 119, 123, 182, 186, 
210, nos. 96, 125, 146, 159, 161 

Aga Bey, no. 142 

ager Dentheliates, 156 

ager privatus, no. 10 

ager publicus, 31 f., 47, 179, 181, nos. 
I, 3, 5, 10: alienation forbidden, 
nos. 26, 55: disputes concerning, 
NOS. 55, 57» 58; 59, 63, 68, 82, 104: 
sale regulated, nos. 121, 129: con- 
fiscated, no. 157: octonarius and 
stipendiarius, no. 74 

agoranomus, 25, 28, no. 206 

Ain-el Djemela, no. 93 

Ain Zui, no. 152 

Alabanda, no. 22 

album: ofsenate, 65, 202: of Canusium, 
no. 136 

Alexandria, 71, 83, 103, 244f., nos. 
165, 166, 168, 173, 192, 193 

Amastris, 150 

Ambracia, 45 n. 1 

Amisus, 43 n. 2, 146, 160 

amphodon, no. 191 

Anauni, no. 49 

Ancyra, 147, no. 38 

angary, no. 131 

Antinoopolis, 103, 192, nos. 170, 173, 

176, 183, 184 

Antioch, 24, 144: in Pisidia, no. 65 a 

Antiochus, nos. 1, 147 

Antium, 3, 5, 177 


Antony, 5, 39, nos. 26, 29, 38 

Apamea, 52, 68, 151, NOS. 34, 123, 147 

Aphrodisias, 39, 41 n. 4, nos. 29, 120, 
137, 138, 145 

Apollonides, 40 n. 3 

appeals: from imperial estates, nos. 
139, I41, 142, 143, 144: from pro- 
vincial assemblies to Rome, 172: 
regulated by law, nos. 90, 121: to 
Rome, 79, nos. 12, 14, 21, 36,63, 78, 
81, 97, 100, 119, 121: to governor, 
nos. 35, 68, 90, 104, 112, 113, 139, 
141: from nomination to office in 
Egypt, nos. 181, 182, 183, 185: 
from exactions of strategus, no. 202. 
See also under embassies 

Appius Claudius, 154 

Apulum, 14 

Aquincum, 14 

Araegenuae, no. 140 

Araguenl, 53 n. 3, no. 141 

a rationibus, no. 109 

arbitration, 152 ff., nos. 8, 10, 15, 18, 
46, 57, 58, 82, 104 

archephodus, 28 

archiereus, 28 

archiphylax, 170 

archives, 244 n. 8, 245 N. §, Nos. 9, 22, 
24, 26, 29, 36, 65, 96 

archon, 56 

Arelate, no. 107 

Areopagus, 77, no. 91 

Argos, 22 

Aricia, 8 

Aritium, no. 47 

Arpinum, 138 

Asculum, no. 13 

Asia, 48, 119, 163 ff., 167, 168, 183, 
185, NOS. 127, 157, 158 

asiarch, no. 158 

assemblies: local, 199; see also under 
comitia: provincial, 162 ff.; influ- 
ence in provincial government, 165; 
relation to municipalities, 166 ff.; 
of Africa, nos. 125, 159, 161; of 
Asia, nos. 34, 158; of Dalmatia, no. 


[ 588 ] 


INDEX 


assemblies (cont.) 
41; of Gaul, nos. 50, 62, 140; of 
Lycia, nos. 15, 84, 87, 973; of Thes- 
saly, no. 46: privileges of flamen, 
no. 62: veto power of emperor, no. 
62: method of voting and procedure, 
no. 62: asks governor for permission 
to forward copy of decree to em- 
peror, no. 102: cost of shows regu- 
lated, no. 110: regulation of liturgies 
of festival in Asia, no. 158 

Assos, nos. 48, 94 

Astypalaea, 41 n.4, 130 n.3, 161, 
nos. 75, 76 

asylum, nos. 3, 17, 29 

aréXera, IOI, Nos. 29, 139. See also 
under immunity 

Ateste, nos. 28, 31 

Athens, 75, 139, 154 f., nos. 6, 21, 90, 
QI, 92, 130 

Attalus, no. 12 

attributi, nos. 2, 10, 16, 17, 25, 29, 49, 
53, 107 

augurs, nos. 26, 126 

Augustales, no. 43 

autonomy, 40 n.1, 82, nos. 3, 4, II, 
16, 17, 19, 25, 40, 67, 108. See 
civitas libera 


Baetica, 48, nos. 60, 61, 66 

Baetocaece, no. 147 

Baiae, no. 149 

banking, 139, nos. 81, 199 

Bantia, na. 11 

Beneventum, nos. 38, 154 

Bergalei, no. 49 

Beroia, no. 118 

billeting of troops, nos. 19, 113, 139, 
I4I, 152 

Bithiynia and Pontus, 74, 76, 150, 160, 
163, 166, 182, 189 
ovianum, no. 109 

brabeutae, 25 

Britain, no. 140 

Brixia, nos. 38, 154 

buildings in municipalities: destruc- 
tion forbidden, nos. 20, 65, 83 

bureaucracy, 151, 165, 186, 219f., 
228 f.: in Egypt, 36 

bureaus: names and duties, 240 f. 

burgi, no. 128 

Byzantium, 24, 68, 150 


Caesariani, no. 141 

Calaguris, no. 77 

Calama, 142 

Camerinum, 161 

canabae, 10, 13f., 65: magister and 
curatores, 13 

candidacy of magistrates: at Urso, 
no. 26: at Malaca, no. 65 

Canusium, 65, no. 136 

Cappadocia, 73, 185 

Capua, 11 

caput, unit of taxation, 130 

Caranis, no. 177 

Carnuntum, 14 

Carteia, 7, 184 

Carthage, 11, 46, 47, 66, 156 f., 184 

Casae, no. 96 

Casinum, 66 n. 4 

castellum, 10 ff., 65, no. 27: prefect of, 
12: Carcassonne, 13 n. 1 

cautio: magistrates, nos. 20, 65, 77: 
tax-gatherers, no. 92: in appeals, 
no. 119 

Celeia, no. 42 

censor: in East, 76: in West, 59 f.: 
Bantia, no. 11: in Italy, no. 24 

census: in Egypt, no. 166, 196: of 
Augustus, 120: of Diocletian, 132 

centumviri, no. 43 

Centuripae, 47, 138 

Cercina, 45, n. 5 

cessio bonorum, nos. 181, 185, 198. 
See liturgies 

charities: municipal, 208, 218. See 
endowments 

charters, nos. 11, 20, 24, 25, 26, 64, 65, 
151: number granted by Vespasian, 
no. 60 

Chersonese, no. 112 

Chios, 40 n. 3, 82, nos. 40, 69 

Chrysopolis, 24 

Church Councils, 176: and municipal 
institutions, 224 f. 

Chyretiae, no. 1 

Cibyra, no. 123 

Cicero, 50f.,80, 121, 136, 149, 187, 202 

Cierium, no. 46 

Cilicia, 50 ff., 80, 119, 136, 149, 187, 
202 

citizenship: various classes in Asia, 
nos. 65a, 122: how attained, 58: 
decrees submitted to governor, 97, 


[ 589 ] 


INDEX 


citizenship (cont.) 
no. 130: sold, 139, no. 130: held in 
several cities, nos. 24, 94, see also 
under origo: Latin c. to Trans- 
padane Gaul, 6; to Spain, no. 60: 
Latins in Salpensa, no. 64: right of 
Latins to vote in provincial towns, 
no. 65, see also ius Latii: Roman 
citizens: privileges in colony, 5 f., 
58; vote in colonies, no. 65: Roman 
citizenship granted to individuals, 
nos. 13, 423 to ex-magistrates, 
no. 64, see also ius Latii; to com- 
munities, nos. 49> 535 60; to Italy, 
180; to peregrini, 188, no. 192: 
Romans exempt from liturgies, 1035 
no. 1923; subject to laws of autono- 
mous states, nos. 25, 40; in Egypt, 
nos. 166, 173, 192; in East, 77. See 
also attributi, origo 

Civitas: general term applied to cities 
after A.D. 312, 192, no. 154: reduced 
in status, 13, 22, NO. 154: censoria, 
47, 181: foederata, 40, 47, 160, 
177 ff., nos. 7, 8, 10, II, 16, 17, 255 
57, 64, 75, 90: libera et immunis, 
39 ff., 128 f., 180, 201, nos. 15, 25, 
30> 34, 36, 525 545 75> 79s 106, 108, 
119, 120, 121, 145, 153, 154: stipen- 
diaria, 39 ff., 47 f., 71, 80, 181, nos. 
64, 95, II5, 192: sine suffragio, 
177 f. 

clarissimi, 104 

Claudiopolis, 150 

client kingdoms, 73, 185 

Clunia, no. 135 

Cnidos, no. 36 

Cnossus, 154 

coinage, 6, 80, 170: debasement, 20, 
129: depreciation, 220 ff., 228: at 
Termessus, 45: exchange a muni- 
cipal monopoly, nos. 81, 133, 
199 

collationes, nos. 142, 143, 144 

collegiality, 62, 89, nos. 181, 187: of 
officials, 56, 78: in Egypt, 28, nos. 
181, 187. See also guilds, honores, 
priesthoods 

coloni, 75541731207 58,1107) ti tsetnts 
206, 211, 217 ff., nos. 74, 93, III. 
See also under saltus: distinguished 
from incolae, no. 65 a 


colonia, 4 ff.: honorary title, 188: in 
Orient, 71: veterans, 7, 180, 184, 
no. 63: founded by Augustus, nos. 
335° 38: Latin, 4 ff.,- 197f,, 184: 
Romian,) 4 ff.5) 277 £5797 278,485; 
NOS. 20, 27, 28, 49, 50, 65a, 126, 
149: c. Alexandria Troas, no. 88: 
c. Caesaraugustana, 58, 66 n.4: 
c. Cillitana, no. 153: c. genetiva 
Iulia, see Urso: c. Mariana, 7, 
no. 59: c. Tarraconensis, 58 

comarch, 21, 25, 29, no. 200 

comes primi ordinis, 94. 

comitia, 64: election of magistrates, 
no. 65: at Tarentum, no. 20: in 
Italy, no. 24. See assemblies 

commentaril: principum, 244, no. 49; 
senatus, no. 96 

commerce, 223 f. 

commissions, 72, 74, 200, nos. 4, 8. 
See provinces 

comogrammateus, 29, nos. 
180, 183, 190 

compulsion, nos. 165, 167. See also 
liturgies 

Comum, no. 49 

conciliabulum, 10, nos. 24, 27, 28 

concilium of Umbria and Tuscia, 
nos. 155, 159. See also assemblies 

conductor: taxes, 103, nos. 165, 167, 
171, 185: saltus, 18, 20, nos. 74, III 

consilium principis, 241f., no. 63: 
proconsulis, no. 58 

constitutiones principum, 233 ff., no. 
86 

consul in towns, 56 

contributions of emperors to towns, 
no. 101. See also public works, gifts, 
endowments 

conventus civium Romanorum, 13, 
77, 192, NOS. 1233 192 

conventus: juridical and politica! in 
Spain, no. 135 

cooptation, 65. See also honores 

Coptus, no. 173 

Corinth, 22, 40 n. 1, 66, 70, nos. 9, 56 

Coronea, nos. 5, 104 

corrector, 81, 161, 201, nos. 155, 156, 
159 

Corsica, no. 59 

Cos, no. 119 

cosmete, no. 181, 198 


172, 178, 


[ 59° ] 


INDEX 


courts: local, 43, 60f., see also juris- 
diction: ecclesiastical, 205: of pro- 
vincial assemblies, 172: of fora and 
conciliabula, no. 24 

irete, 737,167} 170; nNowss 

Cumae, 11, no. 149 

curator rei publicae: origin, 63 
powers, 92 ff.: history, go ff.: gene- 
Pale S 51S Lite hh 27 1 Stet los aO%s 
201, 204, 229: nominated to litur- 
gies, 98: title in Orient, 91, nos. gr, 
123 

Cures, 65, no. 43 

curia, 85, 94, 207, 216 f., 225, 229: at 
Tymandus, no. 151: in villages, 23: 
elected officials, 85: responsibility 
for liturgies, 98: deserted, 110 ff., 
198 ff. See also curiales, senate 

curiales, 113 f., 194 f., 202 f., 206 ff., 
215 f., 222,225, 229 ff.: escape from 
liturgies, 106, see a/so liturgies: Jews 
and Christians in membership, r1of. 
See also decurions, senate 

cursus fiscalis, no. 156 

cursus honorum, 59, 78, 84, 85, no. 
10 

cursus publicus, 137, 149, no. 156. 
See also post 

Cyzicus, no. 106 


decaproti and decemprimi, 94, 113, 
170, 222, no, 89: in Egypt, no. 197 

decemvirl, 56 

decentralization, 185 

decline: municipal institutions, 198 ff., 
226 ff.: village communities, no. 
186: of democratic institutions, 
186 ff. 

decreta, 235, 236, 239: of Roman 
magistrates, nos. 2, 13, 57, 58: of 
cities, NOS. 14, 23, 43, 48, 52, 66, 
67, 69, 70, 72, 88, 94, 95, 115, 117; 
{22512 Ff 120; MAS ADs tks ThO, 
149, 156, 159: Of provincial as- 
semblies, nos. 34, 125, 161 

decumae, 39, 118, 127 

decurions: in West, 65 ff.: in East, 
76 ff.: honorary, 77: album, 65, 
no. 136: named by magistrates, 
no. 24: elected by comitia, no. 24: 
removal from office, no. 26: eligi- 
bility, 65 f., no. 24: in documents, 


NOS. 20, 24, 26, 33, 43, 61, 63, 65 a, 
126, 136, 146, 149. See also curiales, 
senate 

dediticii, no. 192 

defense, permission to levy local troops, 
no. 26 

defensor: plebis, 78, 90, 92 ff., 112, 
195, 201, 205, 229: on imperial 
estates, no. 74 

deforestation, 212, no. 118 

Delos, nos. 6, 21 

Delphi, 39, 155, no. 3 

demarch, 25 

Demetrias, 21 

democracy, 70, 75, 182, 186f., 195, 
199, 227 ff.: ‘restored’ at Pergamum, 
nO. 23 

Snpooi@vat, NOS. 12, 14, 17, 18 

dictator in Italian towns, 56 

diplomata, no. 156 

domicile: required of municipal magis- 
trates, no. 26. See also origo 

dominium, 9 

Dorylaeum, no. 34 

duoviri, 11, 12, 56, 59, 60, 89, nos. 24, 
26, 27, 28, 33, 45, 53, 64, 65, 65, 
66, 77, 115, 126, 136, 140: election 
of emperor, no. 64 


ecclesia: in villages, 25: in towns, 75 

ecdicus, 25, 167 

economic conditions, 209 ff. See also 
decline 

edicts, 232 f., 235 ff., 242, nos. 33; 39, 
49, 51, 56, 92, 105, 118, 124, 129, 
131, 132, 147, 155, 162-165, 167, 
168, 175, 177, 181, 185, 190, 192— 
195: provincial, 48 ff., 199: Cilician, 
50 ff.: e. Siciliense, 50: tralaticium, 
50: perpetuum, 239: Caracalla, 53, 
57» 77) 103, 125, 161, 191 f., no. 192 

Egypt, 27 ff., 33 ff., 83, 89 ff., 99 ff., 
102, 118, 132/ff-,/ 139,285, 213; 
244 ff., nos. 162-206 

Ekiskuju, no. 144 

election of magistrates: fifty days before 
beginning of year, no. 34: by popu- 
lar assembly, nos. 24, 26: at Nola 
on July 1, no. 45: at Malaca, no. 65 
in the East, 78 f.: in Africa, 85: in 
local senate, 186f. See honores, 
candidacy, appeals 


[ 591 ] 


INDEX 


embassies to Rome, 186, 200, nos. 3-7, 
10, 25, 26, 29, 47, 48, 53, 59, 78, 81; 
83, 104, 126, 127, 139, I4I, 145. 
See also appeals 

emperors: policies re municipalities, 
184 ff., see appeals, contributions, 
embassies, estates, governor, public 
works, edicts, epistulae, decreta, 
etc.: Augustus, 42, 59, 60, 62, 63,66, 
72582) 86, 1204.,.125 £4 147.1.,161, 
THZt GIS GIRO, SL Eshea ote tO; 
NOS. 255 323 33> 36-38, 40-43, 52, 
59, 61-63, 73, 130, 138, 147: 
Tiberius, 44, 60, 61, 63, 137, 147; 
148, 211, 233, NOS. 45, 47, 49, 50: 
Gaius, nos. 47-50: Claudius, 137, 
148, nos. 49-54, 68, 162-165: Nero, 
16, 60, I2I, 129, 137, 148, 220, 
nos. 52, 54-57: Galba, nos. 59, 165: 
Otho, no. 58: Vespasian, 17, 109, 
148, 161, 185, nos. 25, 26, 56, 59— 
64, 67, 93: Titus, no. 64: Domitian, 
167, 168, nos. 63-66, 166, 167: 
Nerva, 211, nos. 51, 67: Trajan, 66, 
68, 91, 148, 150, 160, 168, 189, 200, 
237, nos. 65 a, 68, 71-75, 168, 169: 
Fiadrian, 17,953) 7.551835 12,557547 1.5 
161, 188, 192, 235, 239, 241, nos. 
25, 51, 61, 76-86, 88-95, 104, 108, 
129, 170, 183, 184: Antoninus, 58, 
IOI, 109, NOS. 97—108, 126, 127, 130, 
170, 175,176,184: Marcus Aurelius, 
197, NOS. I10, 125, 179, 181: Com- 
modus, 17, NOs. LIO-I14, 125, 139, 
178-181: Pertinax, 211: Septimius 
Severus, 29, 83, 113, 134, 161, 194, 
223, NOS. 127, 130-133) 139, 177, 
183, 187, 189-191: Caracalla, see 
edicts, NOs. 127, 130-134, 139, 189- 
195: Geta, nos. 131, 133: Severus 
Alexander, 44, 131, 147, 148, 221, 
nos. 135, 137, 138, 157,- 196: 
Maximinus, no. 139: Gordian, no. 
139: Philip, no. 141: Decius, nos. 
145, 198: Valerian, no. 147: Gal- 
lienus, 129, nos. 200-202: Aurelian, 
80, 113, 220, 222: Diocletian, 82, 
88, 124, 127 ff., 149f., 194, 204, 
220 f.: Constantine, 20, 24, 91, 101, 
105, 107, IOQ—-II, 208, 220, 222, 
225, NOs. 153-155: Crispus, no. 154: 
Constans, no. 155: Constantius, 


148, NOs. 154, 155, 157: Julian, 44, 
131, 147, 225, no. 156: Valentinian, 
III, 116, nos. 157, 158: Valens, 27, 
nos. 157, 158: Gratian, nos, 157, 
158: Theodosius, 105, 110, 124, 
206: Honorius, 92, 99, 108: Ma- 
jorian, 92, 111: Justinian, 91, 92, 
106,-117;°116;1226; Boz 

Emporia, 157 

emporium, no. 131 

endowments, 135, 169, nos. 69, 71, 87, 
98, 116, 123, 189 

Ephesus, 76, 158, 167, NOS. 15, 225 39, 
71, 78, 85, 86, 98, 100, IOI, 105, 
124, 157, 158 

ephorus, 29 

em BoAn, 37, 211. See adiectio 

epicrisis, no. 166 

Epidaurus, 40 n. 5 

em iNoyx Ol, no. 181 

epistates, 28 

epistrategus, 28, 101, nos. 169, 172-4, 
179-183, 185, 187, 200 

epistulae, 236 ff., nos. I, 3, 4) 9, 22, 
253 29s 30; 32) 359 36, 40, 61, 63, 68, 
71, 73-80, 82-87, 91, 93, 97-102, 
104, 108, 109, 112-114, I18—120, 
124, 127, 129, 130, 134, 137, 143, 
145, 146, 148, 151, 154, 170, 189, 
202 

emiTNpyTal, NO. 203 

Equus Tuticus, no. 154 

estates: royal, 31: temple, 23, nos. 14, 
18, 35: Church, 217: private, 203, 
216 ff.: imperial, 23, 31 ff., nos. 49, 
57> 74 83> 90, 93, 109, 125, 1395 
I4l, 142, 143, 157. See also lati- 
fundia, saltus, territoria 

Eumenia, no. 34 

eutheniarch, 28, no. 206 

exactions of officials, 136, 186, nos. 
113, 139-143, 152, 162-164. See 
appeals, embassies 

exactores, 131, 532, 222, nos. 167, 171, 
185 

excusati, no. 136 

exegete, 28, nos. 181, 187, 194, 203 

expenses of municipality, 143 ff. 


Falerio, no. 63 
Faydm, nos. 171, 172, 174, 175) 178— 
180, 190, 194, 196 


[ 592 ] 


INDEX 


ferries a municipal monopoly, 139, 
nos. 70, 128 

Fidenae, 187 

finances, municipal, 138 ff. See under 
monopolies, vectigalia, taxes 

fines: a source of revenue, 141 ff., nos. 
24, 26, 64, 65, 128 

Firmum, no. 63 

fisheries, 139, no. 68 

flamens: of municipality, 64, nos. 53, 
62, 115, 136: of province, 166, no, 
62, 84, 87, 102, 110, 158, 159 

Flamininus, 69, nos. 1, 5, 8 

foedus aequum, r16o0f. See civitas 
foederata 

fora, 10, nos. 24, 27, 131. See em- 
porium 

Formiae, 8 

Forum: Livi, 12: Populi, 12 

freedom, nos. 15, 34. See civitates 
liberae 

frumentarii, nos. 142, 144 

Fundi, 8 


Gabinius, 72, no. 21 

Galatia, 73, 163, nos. 38, 57, 154 

Galillenses, no. 58 

Gallia, 15, 119, 123, 164, 170, 185, 
204, 210, NOS. 27, 50, 110, 140 

games and shows, 145, nos. 26, 73, 
IIO, 155, 158, 169 

gens, 10, 15 

Genua, II, 139, no. 10 

gerusia, 25, 77, nos. 78, 114 

gifts, 142. See endowments 

Gigthi, nos. 115, 161 

Girgeh, no. 163 

Gortyna, 154, no. 55 

governor: appeals, 99, see under ap- 
peals: approved municipal decrees, 
nos. 80, 98, 99, 114: veto, 168, nos. 
84, 97: veto power overruled by 
emperor, no. 97: edict, see edicts: 
powers, 202 ff.; defined in Asia by 
lex Cornelia, no. 34: ratifies endow- 
ment, no. 71: regulates prices, no. 
65 a: judicial power, 204 ff., nos. 64, 
78: regulates municipal taxes, 130, 
no. 61: nominates to liturgies, 98: 
establishes market, no. 148: settles 
strikes, no. 124: oversight of 
municipal finances, 151, no. 98. 


AMA 


See lex provinciae, 
epistulae 

Gracchi, 7, 122, 179, 183f., 210, 
no. 20 

guilds, 77: immunity from liturgies, 
103, 107 ff., 207 f.: local and im- 
perial, 107 ff.; purpose, 194: here- 
ditary, 208: navicularii, 108: muni- 
cipal, nos. 124, 204. See also 
collegiality, gerusia, conventus c. 
R., neon 

gymnasiarch, 28, nos. 169, 181, 187, 
198, 203, 206 


assemblies, 


Halaesa, 47 

Haliartus, no. 5 

Halicyae, 47 

Hastenses, no. 2 

Helvetii, 15 

Henchir-Snobbeur, no. 146 

Heptacomia, no. 192 

Heraclea: at Latmos, no. 4: in Mace- 
donia, no. 79 

Heracleia, 49, no. 24 

Hermopolis, nos. 169, 181, 198, 201, 
202 

Hermopolites, no. 200 

Hierapolis, 24, no. 117 

Hierapytna, 154 

Hispellum, no. 155 

Histria, no. 68 

honores, 84 ff. passtm: in West, 56 ff.: 
in East, 77 f.: fasti, no. 45: in muni- 
cipal charters, nos. 11, 20, 24, 26, 
64, 65: election in Asia, no. 34: ius 
honorum granted to Gauls, no. so: 
honores flaminum, no. 62. See also 
candidacy, election, and titles of 
various offices 

hospes, no. 26 

hospitium, nos. 26, 113, 132) 137, 1385 
147 

hyparchy, no. 37 

hypomnematographus, 28, nos. 203, 
204 


idia, see origo 

Igabrum, no. 60 

Ilium, 24, 41 n. 2, 138, nos. 12, 14 
illustres, 105 

Illyria, 123, 185, no. 130 

Ilugo, no. 95 


[ 593 ] 38 


INDEX 


immunity: from liturgies, ro1 ff., 
20sf.: of philosophers, no. 127: 
granted by emperor, nos. 42, 158: 
by decree of local assembly, no. 43: 
from imperial taxation, no. 53; to 
Delphi, no. 3; to Mitylene, no. 25; 
to Delos, no. 213 see also under 
civitas libera et immunis: Trans, 
no. 130: settlers in Pizus, no. 131: 
pontiffs and augurs, no. 26: citizens 
of Antinoopolis, nos. 170, 176, 183: 
Alexandrians and Romansin Egypt, 
nos. 165, 173, 192: physicians, no. 
174: veterans, nos. 177, 192: women, 
no. 179: priests, no. 178. See also 
appeals, liturgies, honores 

incolae, 58, nos. 26, 53, 65, 65a 

indictio, 129 

inscriptio, 238 

intercessio, nos. 11, 64 

interrex, 56 

intributio, 97 

irenarch, 99, 170 

Italica, no. 110 

Itanus, 154 

iudex as title of governor, 204 

lugatio,no. 157 — . 

iugum as unit of taxation, 130, no. 
157 

iuridici, 204 

ius Civitatis, nos. 151, 154 

ius conubii, 6, nos. 53, 184 

ius Italicum, 9, 72, 188, 192 

ius iurandum, nos. 37, 47, 48 

ius Latii, 7, 88, 188: maius, minus, 9, 
192, nos. 60, 61, 64, 66, 115, 192 


Jerusalem, 23 

Jews, 110, 134 

Julius Caesar, 5, 7, 14, 15, 59, 66, 68, 
121, 146, 156, 184f., 210, nos. 24 
(lex Iulia municipalis), 25, 26, 29, 50 

jurisdiction: civil and criminal, 61, 64, 
82, 183, 204f., nos. 10, 11, 25, 26, 
27, 28, 33, 36, 40, 58, 64, 65, 65 a, 
77, 131, 133. See also law, courts, 
appeals 


Khargeh, no. 165 

kowov: Of villages, 21 ff., no. 141: of 
magistrates, 28, nos. 169, 181: of 
provinces, see assemblies 


Koula, no. 148 


Lagina, nos. 17, 67 

Lambaesis, 14. 

land: classification in Egypt, 33 ff. 
See ager publicus, estates, saltus, 
territoria 

Langensis, 139, no. 10 

Lanuvium, 8 

Laodicaea, 39, no. 15 

Aaoypahovpevor, NO. 192 

latifundia, 203, 213, 216, 228, no. 129. 
See saltus, estates, land 

Latin rights, see ius Latii 

law: given to Athens by Hadrian, no. 
go: alimentary, 211, 223, no. 65 a: 
administration in East, 82: Greek 
and Oriental versus Roman, 81 f., 
204: extension of R. law, 179 f., 188, 
193: autonomy, local, s.v. See 
jurisdiction, courts 

League, Latin, 177 f. 

leases: of public lands, nos. 5, 10, 24, 
26,995,655 Sagetotnt20;21 57 enon 
temple land, no. 35: disputes con- 
cerning, no. 58: in Egypt, no. 201 

Lepidus, 5 

Lesbos, 130 n. 3 

lex: Aemilia, 49 n. 2: Antonia, no. 26: 
Antonia de Termessibus, 42 ff., no, 
1g: Atestina, no. 28: Bantina, no. 
11: coloniae Genitivae Iuliae, 59 f., 
67, no. 26: Cornelia, 72, no. 34: 
data, 233, NOs. £1, 13) 20, 265 27:3 
de certa portione olei vendunda, 
no. go: de imperio Vespasiani, 161: 
de iudiciis privatis, no. 33: de 
officio flaminum, no. 62: Gabinia 
Calpurnia, no. 21: Hadriana, 17 f., 
nos. 93, 111: Hieronica, 47: Iulia, 
no. 13: lulia agraria, 60, 118: Iulia 
et Plautia Papiria, 8: Iulia muni- 
cipalis, 59 f., 86 f., 180, 185, no. 26: 
Malacitana, 17 f., 58f., 67, no. 65: 
Manciana, 17f., nos. 74, 93: Me- 
telli, 49 n. 2: organizing colony, 4f.: 
Palmyrenorum, no. 89: Plaetoria, 
no. 24: Pompeia, 47, 72, 74, 76: 
Porcia, 44, no. 19: provinciae, 17, 
48 f., 52, 72, 82, 162, 181, 183, 202, 
204, 233, 240: Quinctia de aquae- 
ductibus, no. 33: rogata, 232, nos. 


[ 594 ] 


INDEX 


lex (cont.) 
13, 19, 24, 27: Roscia, nos. 27, 28: 
Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina, ro, 60, 
184, nos. 27, 33: Rupilia, 49, 159: 
Salpensa, no. 64: saltus, no. 93: 
Sempronia, 46, 118 n. 3, 122: Ta- 
rentina, no. 20: Villia annalis, no. 11 

libellus colonorum, no. 111 

liturgies, 84 ff. passim: classification, 
79, 94 f.: exemption, 101 ff., see also 
immunity and appeals: flight of 
incumbents, nos. 180, 189, 190, 194: 
provincial, no. 158: in Egypt, 37, 
83,99 ff., see documentsfrom Egypt 
(nos. 165 ff.), pass¢m: imperial, 189, 
see angary, post, appeals 

logistae, 25, no. 150 

Lucullus, 146 

Lugudunum, 164, nos. 50, 140 

Lusitania, 48, no. 47 

Lycaonia, 164 

Lycia, 164, 166, 169 ff., nos. 80, 128 

Lydia, nos. 142, 148, 150 


Macedonia, 117, 128, 171, no. I 

Maeonia, no. 34 

magister: canabae, 13: saltus, 15, no. 
74: Vicus, I§, NO. I41 

magistrates, see honores 

Magnesia, 40 n. 3, 154 

Malaca, 8, 58, 62, 67, 112, nos. 64, 65 

mandata, 236 ff., 239 

mansiones, nos. 51, 156 

Mantinea, 22 

Marius, 7, 184, no. 38 

markets, 139 n. 9, see emporium, 
fora: in villages, nos, 147, 148: 
in saltus, no. 96: during games at 
Pergamum, no. 73 

Massilia, 41, 138, 146, no. 107 

Melitaea, no. 8 

Mendechora, no. 143 

Messana, 47 

Messene, 1 56 

metrocomia, 22 f., no. 113 

Metropolis, no. 46 

metropolis, 28 f. 

Miletus, 156, no. 22 

Minturnae, no. 38 

Mithradates, nos. 16, 17, 19, 21, 40 

Mitylene, 42 

Moesia, no. 130 


monopolies: municipal, 139, 209, 224: 
banking, no. 81: ferry, nos. 71, 
128: fishing, no. 68: weaving, no. 
204 

Mucius Scaevola, 158, 163 

Mummius, 70, 156, 163, nos. 8, 9 

munera, see liturgies 

municeps, 58 

municipia: definition, 8f.: in Italy, 
177 f., 180: in provinces, 9:fundana, 
9, no. 24: charters, 8, see lex Iulia 
municipalis, Bantia, Tarentina: Fla- 
via, nos. 60, 61, 64, 65: developed 
from praefecturae, 11; from colonies, 
etc., nos. 20, 95, 115: at Volubilis, 
no. 53 

Municipium Augustum, 58 

Mutina, 7 

Mylasa, 139, 154f., nos. 22, 30, 32, 
89, 133 

Myra, nos. 99, 128 


Nacoleia, 24, no. 154 

Narbo, no. 62 

Narbo Martius, 7, 184, no. 38 

Narthacium, no. 8 

Naucratis, 83, no. 184 

Neaetum, 41 n. 4 

Neapolis, 148 

negotiatores, 131 

Neilopolis, nos. 178, 182 

Nemausus, 138 

neocorate, 81 

neon, 77, no. 106 

Neptunia, no. 20 

Netum, 47 

Nicaea, 68, 144, 150 

Nicomedia, 68, 143, 150 

Nola, no. 45 

nomarch, 29 

nomination of officials, 59 ff., 78 f., 
85 ff., 202, nos. 24, 34, 65:in Egypt, 
nos. 172, 173, 181, 185, 198, 200, 
203 

vopwoypadpevs, 172 

vopos T@ANTLKOS, NO. 129 

Nuceria, 158, no. 11 

Numidia, nos. 125, 140, 152 

nundinae, no. 96. See emporia, fora 


Oath: of loyalty, nos. 37, 38, 47, 48: 
of magistrates, nos. 64, 65 


[ 595 ] 


INDEX. 


octroi, 139. See portoria 

oligarchy: favoured by governors, 72, 

. 182, 183, 186 f., 229 f.: pro-Roman 
party in power, nos. 5, 9 

dpdAoyot, no. 192 

6povota, 161 

oppida: definition, 4, ro: attributa, 
138, nos. 16, 17, 27, 33, 107, 154 

Opramoas, nos. 80, 84, 87, 97; 995 
102 

oratio principum, 234 ff., 244, nos. 50, 
56, 110 

Orcistus, 13, 24, No. 154 

Orientalism, 26, 193, 227 ff. 

Origo, 194, 208, 211, 216, 226, nos. 
129, 158, 168, 182, 192, 193 

Oropus, 154f., nos. 12, 18 

Ostia, 3, no. 160 

Oxyrhynchus, nos. 166, 167, 185, 
187-189, I9I, 195, 197, 199, 203, 
204, 206 


pagani, no. 107. See also villages 

pagus, ro, 14 f. 

Pagus Apollinaris, Lucretius, Martius, 
Valerius, Veronensis, 14 

Palmyra, 44 n. 7, 140, no. 89 

Panormus, 47 

Paphos, 148 

paraphylaces, no. 117 

Parma, 7 

Paros, no. 132 

particularism, 195 

Passala, 140 

paternalism, 80, 189, 200, no. 71 

Patrae, 42 

patronage, patrocinium, 26, 113, 203, 
215, 217, NO. 142 

patroni: of senate, 65: at Asso, no. 94: 
at Brixia, no. 44: at Canusium, no. 
136: at Clunia, no. 135: at Genua, 
no. 10: at Malaca, no. 65: at Stra- 
tonicea, no. 67: at Urso, no. 26 

Patulcenses, no. 58 

Pautalia, no. 139 

peculation of municipal funds, no. 
20 

pedani, no. 136 

peregrini: given Roman citizenship, 
no. 192: peregrine city made a 
municipium, no. 53 

perfectissimi, 105 


Pergamum, 163, nos. 12, 22, 23, 73> 
‘ 81, 100, 124, 133 

Phaenae, no. 113 

Phazimon, no. 37 

Philadelphia, nos. 134,. 143: in Egypt, 
no. 183 

Philip of Macedon, no. 1 

Phrygia, nos. 123, 141, 154 

phylaces, 28 

phylarch, 21 

Pisaurum, no. 38 

Pisidia, nos. 19, 65 a, 122, 151 

Pizus, 26, no. 131 

Plasara, no. 29 

plebiscite, no. 19 

Pliny, 53, 65, 68, 80, 136, 150 ff., 202, 
215 

Pogla, 23, no. 122 

Pompaelo, no. 77 

Pompeii, 143, 144, 158 f. 

Pompey, 23, 42) 49, 72, 76, 86, nos. 
13520, 25, 26a 7 

pontiff, 64, no. 26 

populus: in West, 57: in East, 75 

portoria, nos. 19, 39, 89, 130. See 
taxes 

possessores, 131, no. 146 

post, imperial, 129, 136, no. 51. See 
angary, liturgies 

praefectura, 10 ff., nos. 24, 27, 28 

praefectus: iure dicundo in muni- 
cipalities, 11, 15, 17, 59, 62f., 
Nos. 24, 26-28, 33, 64: of emperor 
in municipalities, 62f., no. 64: 
pagorum, 15: praetorio, 60, 130, 
NOs. 109, 140, 154, 156: urbi, 61: 
of Egypt, nos. 162 ff. 

praetextati, 65, no. 136 

praetor in municipalities, 56 

T payparevTiss no. 139 

7 PAYLATLK OS» nos. 139, 196 

prices regulated, nos. 65 a, 90, 91 

Priene, 154 f., nos. 8, 14, 34 

priesthoods: elected, 64: sold, 79: 
honor, 93: exemption, 109 f., nos. 
164, 178. See also under augurs, 
flamens, pontiff 

primus curiae, 94 

princeps, 234. See emperors 

principales, 94, 99 

private ownership developed in Egypt, 
37 


[ 596 ] 


INDEX 


privileges of towns ratified by suc- 
ceeding emperors, nos. 40, 59, 75; 
108: of free cities, see civitas libera 

procurator: regionis, 18: saltus, trac- 
tus, 17, NOS. 93, III 

7 pwtompaégia; no. 78 

provinces, see lex provinciae, governor 

Prusa, 75, 150, 151 

prytanis, 25, nos. 184, 198, 201, 203; 
204, 206 

Ptolemais, 83, no. 170 

publicani, 32) 73, 121 N. 2, 160, 199, 
222, NOS. 5, 12, 14, 18, 19, 235 35 89 

public works at imperial expense, 148, 
NOS. 31, 33» 729 103 

Puteoli, 60, 159 


quadrarius, 29 

quaestor, 59, 89, nos. 64, 65 

quattuorvirl, 11, 59, NOS. 20, 24, 275 
28, 61, 63 

quindecimviri, no. 149 

quorum, nos. 11, 26, 33, 65 


Ragusa, no. 41 

recognovi, 238, 242 f. 

recorder, 25 

redemptor, 121 

regiones of Asia, no. 22 

requisitions: in free states, 44: in 
tributary states, 53: in villages, 27: 
imperial, 117 ff., 136, 219, nos. 19, 
131, see also angary, exactions, and 
taxes 

rescripsi, 242 f. 

rescripta, 236 ff., nos. 59, 81, III, 121, 
139, I4I, 152, 155, 157, 158 

res gestae, 147, no. 38 

revenues, see under finances, taxes, 
vectigalia 

revocatio, no. 28 

Rhodes, 41 n. 4, 155, nos. 52, 54 

Rhodiapolis, 172, no. 80 

rivalry of Asiatic cities, 81, 142, 218, 
NOS. 100, 134 

Romanization, 188 

Rusicade, 66 


Saborenses, 53 n. I, no. 61 
Saepinum, no. 109 
Sagalassus, no. 57 
Salamis, 183 


salaries, 143, no. 26 

Salpensa, 8, 62, no. 64 

saltus: in Africa, 16: organization, 
17 ff.: compulsory tenancy, 20: in 
Asia and Egypt, 31 ff.: Beguensis,, 
no. 96: Burunitanus, 19, no. 111: 
Domitianus, Lamianus, Neronianus, 
no. 93. See also estates, latifundia 

Samos, 155, no. 8 

Sardinia, nos. 56, 58 

Sardis, 158, nos. 22, 134 

Saturnia, 7 

Scaptoparene, 53 n. 3, 243, NO. 139 

scriptura, 120 

secretary of villages, 25 

Segesta, 47 

senate: in West, 56 f.: in East, 76 f.: 
decrees of Roman senate, 48: 
Hadrian nominates senator at Ephe- 
sus, no. 85: in Egypt, 83, nos. 195, 
203, 204. See also curia 

senatus consulta, 232 ff., 241, nos. 5-8, 
12, 16-18, 25, 55, 73, 86, 96, 106, 
110 

sententia, no. 10 

sermo, NO. 93 

Sicily, 46 ff., 117 ff., 121, 123, 128, 
149, 158 f., 181 f.320%.f4 210 

Sicyon, 154 f. 

Sidon, 41 n. 1 

Sidyma, 171, no. 114 

Sigkepha, no. 185 

Sinduni, no. 49 

Sinope, 150, no. 126 

Sipylum, 40 n. 3 

sitologi, 29 

sitonae, 170 

Smyrna, nos. 22, 70, 100, 127 

sodales familiae publicae, no. 160 

soldiers, 106 f. See also veterans 

Solemnis, no. 140 

Spain, 15, 48, 123, 165, 185, 204, 210, 
nos. 2, 26, 60, 61, 64, 65, 94, 135 

Sparta, 155 f., no. 121 

spectabiles, 105 

stabula, no. 156 

oraOuos, NO. 131 

stationarli, nos. 109, 144 

stipendium, see taxes, vectigalia, civi- 
tas stipendiaria 

strategus, 36, 56, 78, 100 f., nos. 165— 
205 passim 


E5924 


INDEX 


Stratonicea, 146, nos. 17, 67 

Stratonicea-Hadrianopolis, no. 83 

strikes, no. 124 

subscriptio, 236 ff., 244, nos. III, 154 

sufes, 56, NOS. 44, 45, $3, 146 

Sufes, 13 

Sulla, 5, 72, 146, 159, 180, 184, nos. 
15-18, 22, 34, 40 

summa honoraria, 62, 76, 79, 87, nos. 
85, I51, 181, 203: in villages, 25, 
no. 150 

summa legitima, 142 

susceptores, 131 f. 

syndicus, no. 203 

Syria, 163, 213, no. 147 


Tabae, 42 n. 1, nos. 15, 16 

tabularii, 131 

tabularium principis, no. 58 

Tampium, no. 140 

Tanagra, no. 99 

Tarentum, 8, no. 20 

Tarraco, 164 

Tarsus, 75, 139 n. 6, no. 130 

Tauromenium, 41 n. 4, 47 

taxes, 117 ff. See vectigalia 

Teanum Sidicinum, no. 11 

Tebtunis, no. 179 

Tegea, no. 51 

temple-lands, 33, 35, 135, MOS. 12, 14, 
18, 35, 82, 129 

temple-states, 22 f., 32 

tenancy, 31, 33, 34. 37, 217. See 
estates, latifundia, saltus, coloni 

Teos, 50, no. 3 

Termessus, 42 ff., no. 19 

territoria, 10, 26, 73, 134, 138, 182, 
210, 214, NOs. 27, 49, 59, 68, 82. 
See also ager publicus 

Tetrapurgia, no. 148 

Thamagudi, 65, 91, 143, nos. 125, 136 

Thebaid, no. 163 

Thera, .130 n. 3 

Thessaly, 168, nos. 1, 8 

Thisbe, 50, nos. 5, 104, 129 

Thorigny, 167, no. 140 

Thrace, 185, no. 131 

Thurreion, 40 

Thyatira, no. 35 

Tibur, no. 7 

toparchies, 21, 36, no. 131 

tractus, 17 ff., no. 125 


Tralles, 130 n. 3, no. 122 

transportation, 214. See angary, post 

treaties, 160 f., no. 99. See civitas 
foederata 

tresviri, 56 

tribes, 178, nos. 10, 191 

tribute, 39 ff., 117 ff.: t. capitis, soli, 
11g. See vectigalia 

Tridentinum, no. 49 

Tripolitana, no. 161 

Troas, no. 88 

Troezen, 40 n. 5 

Tulliasses, no. 49 

Turris Lascutana, no. 2 

Tuscia, nos. 155, 1§9 

Tymanda, 24, 74, no. 151 

Tymbrianassus, no. 57 

Tyra, 97, no. 130 

Tyre, 41 n. 1, 42 

Tyrus, 41 n. 4 


Umbria, 155, 159 

uniformity in legislation, 188, 193, 
nos. 22, 40 

urban movement, 209, 211, 223, 228, 
nos. 168, 193 

Urso, 5, 8, 66 ff., 95, 139, no. 26 

Utica, 39 


vacatio, no. 177. See immunity 

Vanacini, no. 59 

vectigalia: annona, 122, 127 ff.: au- 
rum: coronarium, 221, nos. 38, 76, 
150; negotiatorum, 131;oblaticium, 
131, 2213 tironicum, 221, no. 150: 
capitatio plebeia, 119, 122, 128, 131, 
209, 2213 paid by officer of pro- 
vincial assembly, 171: capitulum 
lenocinii, 122, 127, no. 112: cen- 
tesima rerum venalium, 122, 124; 
endowment for, no. 116: collatio 
lustralis, 122, 131: gladiatorial, 122, 
no. rro: house, r20: land, 117, see 
lugum: portoria, s.v.: salt, no. 14: 
vicesima hereditatis, 122, 124, 167, 
no. 192: vicesima libertatis, 122, 
124, 1423 municipal, 140: vicesima 
quinta venalium mancipiorum, 122, 
125:in Egypt, 132 f.; beer, no. 171; 
poll, nos. 166, 176, 196; sales, no. 
167; sheep, no. 1713 collection, nos. 
165, 167, 171, 185, 188, 196, 202, 


[ 598 ] 


INDEX 


vectigalia (cont.) 
205: Diocletian’s reforms, 127, 221: 
Hiero’s system, 121: Sempronian 
law, 182 f.: paid in kind, 120, 221; 
in money, 120: remitted by Au- 
gustus, no. 38; by Hadrian, no. 83: 
applied to building of walls, no. 
157: levy of new taxes by muni- 
cipality approved by provincial 
governor, no. 61: disputes re terri- 
torial tax, nos. 10, 82: collection at 
Athens, no. '92: Delos, no. 21: 
Aphrodisias free from any tax, no. 
29: Greece freed from tribute, no. 
56: Antani(?) at Heraclea, no. 79: 
Histriani, no. 68: Mitylene, no. 25: 
Mylasa, no. 32: Sulla determines 
amount paid by attributi to Strato- 
nicea, no. 17: Thisbe, nos. 5, 104, 
129: water rates at Venafrum, no. 
33: remission of imperial taxes for 
ten years at Volubilis, no. 53. See 
also ager publicus, banking, civitas 
stipendiaria, endowments, finances, 
fines, publicani, summa honoraria 

Veli, 65, no. 43 

Veleia, no. 27 

Venafrum, 140, no. 33 

Verres, 202 

veterans: colonies, 7, 13, 184, 211, 
nos. 33, 38: privileges, 106 f., no. 
166 

vicarli, 130 


vicus, ro f., 14, 21 ff., 65 

Viducasses, no. 140 

villages: attributi, nos. 10, 17, 29, 117, 
147, 154: On imperial estates, see 
saltus, estates: complaints from, see 
embassies, exactions: development 
into cities, 24, 32 f., 73 f., nos. 37, 
83, 115, 122: depopulation, nos. 
139, I41, 154: government, 21 ff., 
nos. 117, 131: Officials, 25 ff., no. 
150: Egyptian, 27 ff.: taxes, 26 f., 
nos. I10, 154: cities reduced to 
villages, 24 ff., no. 154: markets, 
nos. 96, 147, 148: privileges con- 
ferred by Antiochus ratified by 
later emperors, no. 147. See also 
territoria, pagus, vicus 

Villa magna Variana, no. 74 

Villa Mappalia Siga, no. 74 

Viturii, no. 10 

Vocontii, 15, 41 n. 4 

Volsinil, no. 155 

Volubilis, no. 53 

voting in municipal elections, no. 
65 

Vulceii, 130 


walls, no. 157 
waste lands, no. 93 


Xanthus, nos. 97, 116 


Zela, 23 


CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY W. LEWIS, M.A.» AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 














GAYLORD PRINTEDINU,S.A. 


a ty el 
x £ ayy , 


po ¥) Fi 
Al na \b 
he aA eee 

ay, mM i 
| ya en 


¥ 





DG87 .A13 
Municipal administration in the Roman 


ical Seminary—Speer Library 


iii 


14 1012 00133 9730 














